Women in Literature: The Change in the Portrayal of Women Over Time - Max

    Throughout history, literature has played a vital role in shaping/reflecting views on gender. The portrayal of women in literature has evolved massively over time, moving from passive, one-dimensional figures to complex and independent protagonists who drive narratives. From ancient mythology to contemporary fiction, women’s roles in literature offer insight into the world's cultural, social, and political shifts.

    In early literature, women were often confined to specific roles: goddesses, temptresses, maidens, or tragic figures. Greek mythology had figures like Helen of Troy, whose beauty was blamed for war, and Medea, portrayed as a wronged woman and a vengeful villain. Similarly, biblical texts often depicted women as virtuous (Mary) or dangerous (Eve or Delilah).

    Medieval literature continued these limited depictions, with women appearing as damsels in distress, waiting for a male hero to rescue them. In works like Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, women held influence mainly through their beauty or cunning instead of personal agency.

    As literacy rates rose and social norms shifted, women began to gain more representation in literature, both as characters and as authors. The 18th and 19th centuries had more female writers who challenged traditional roles and reshaped how women were portrayed in fiction.

    Jane Austen (Pride and Prejudice & Emma) crafted intelligent, witty heroines who sought love and independence in a world expecting them to marry for security. Mary Shelley (Frankenstein) opposed gender expectations by writing one of the most influential gothic novels of all time, exploring themes of creation, ambition, and responsibility. Charlotte and Emily Brontë (Jane Eyre & Wuthering Heights) made strong and passionate female protagonists who sought self-determination in a society that sought to control them.

    The 20th century saw a dramatic shift in literature, reflecting broader societal changes such as women’s suffrage, increased access to education, and greater independence. Women in literature became more than just love interests or moral guides; they became rebels, intellectuals, and seekers of truth.

    Virginia Woolf (A Room of One’s Own & Mrs. Dalloway) highlighted the struggles of women in the male-dominated literary world, famously stating that a woman must have “a room of her own” to write. Zora Neale Hurston (Their Eyes Were Watching God) portrayed black women’s struggles and triumphs in the face of racism and sexism. Sylvia Plath (The Bell Jar) captured the internal conflicts of women dealing with mental health, societal expectations, and identity.

    Women were no longer confined to simplistic roles; they were complex, flawed, and human. Literature became a space where women could express themselves fully, shedding light on issues like gender inequality, sexuality, and personal agency.

    Today, literature continues to change, offering diverse and powerful portrayals of women. Contemporary writers such as Margaret Atwood (The Handmaid’s Tale), Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie (Half of a Yellow Sun), and Elena Ferrante (The Neapolitan Novels) explore themes of oppression, feminism, and resilience.

    Women in contemporary literature are no longer defined by men or societal expectations. They’re warriors, scientists, artists, leaders, antiheroes, and countless other roles. They fight against patriarchal structures, reclaim their narratives, and exist on their own terms.

The Handmaids Tale

 

“That was when they suspended the Constitution. They said it would be temporary. There wasn't even any rioting in the streets. People stayed home at night, watching television, looking for some direction. There wasn't even an enemy you could put your finger on.”

- Margret Atwood, The Handmaids Tale

    The Handmaids Tale is a book that speaks on women's oppression in the context of the bible. As all books speaking on such topics go, it isn't quite happy. I'll try to be as non-spoilery as possible, but it's somewhat hard.

    The story is about Offred. It isn't her real name, but names are used for handmaids. 

“I want to be held and told my name. I want to be valued, in ways that I am not; I want to be more than valuable. I repeat my former name; remind myself of what I once could do, how others saw me. I want to steal something.” 

There are four-plus-one classes of women: The Wives, in blue, who are married to the commanders; the Marthas, usually used as maids or cooks; the Aunts, the women who teach the name of God in re-education centers; and Handmaids, the women who are meant to go out and get groceries, as well as help repopulate Gilead (previously America) during a war. There are also unwomen, infertile or otherwise compromised women (including but not limited to secular women, women in menopause, and rebel women).

    These women are surveyed by the eyes at all times, and the handmaids must wear wings after leaving their reeducation center. The wings keep them from straying from their duties outside, as well as to keep others from seeing their face. They walk in twos, and no women at all are allowed to read. The bible is read to them by their commander once  month. Scrabble is considered illegal goods for them.

“Knowing was a temptation. What you don't know won't tempt you.”

    Reeducation centers are set up by Aunts and Commanders to help Handmaids learn how to do what they are meant in their new world, while Angels guard them. You are not given much context on Angels.

“There is more than one kind of freedom," said Aunt Lydia. "Freedom to and freedom from. In the days of anarchy, it was freedom to. Now you are being given freedom from. Don't underrate it.”

I won't say much more, as any more would lead to spoilers. I cannot recommend this book enough, it's incredible and harrowing. I could give so much analysis of what it could mean, but it would ruin the book. Truly, read it. The only analysis I give will be this:

The Constitution has been removed from the White House website. The only way to access it from the site is the wayback machine.

-Elanor 

Rebel by Marie Lu

Rebel by Marie Lu is the thrilling conclusion to her Legend series and it did not disappoint! I wrote my previous blog about Legend, the first book, and ever since then, I was eagerly anticipating how June and Day's story would come to a close. It had a perfect blend of action and emotion, all within a new dystopian setting.

Quick Summary: 

Rebel picks up after the events of Champion, with June and Day now apart, each at the center of a new struggle. The Republic of America, where June is working as a high-ranking government official, is in a fragile state. On the other hand, Day is finding a new life in Antarctica, where he is working as a secret police agent. He is still trying to heal from his past wounds and step into a new role. They’re both grappling with deconstructing worlds.

Unlike the previous books in the series that alternated perspectives of June and Day, in this book, we get a viewpoint from Day’s younger brother, Eden. Though Eden was depicted as a young, struggling character in other books, this book displays his growth and wrestling with his role in the world. He faces challenges of his own and asks himself questions about family, the true reality of both of his worlds (Antarctica and the Republic of America), and the political situation they are now stuck in. The tension between the need to protect loved ones and the desire for justice for the greater good is a common theme present throughout the novel.

My Thoughts:

Overall, I really enjoyed the book! June and Day were both already well-established characters by now, and this book concludes their story. Both Day and June have grown into strong individuals and leaders while facing a new struggle in morals and ethics. Both of their journeys, especially Day’s, felt like a natural progression, and I feel like Marie Lu, the author, exhibited their character arc smoothly.

However, the standout character in this book for me was Eden. As the younger brother, he has always been in Day’s shadow, with Day being extremely protective over his last family member. But in Rebel, he steps into the spotlight. Eden struggled with what it means to be his own person, separate from his older brother’s legacy, and he kept secrets from Day, becoming an individual, struggling with his own issues. Hearing a new perspective added a fresh, unique lens on the aftermath of the Republic’s revolution and continual choices that shaped the world. 

The pacing of Rebel was just right, and it didn’t really feel rushed. Maybe I will check out Marie Lu’s other novels!

Year of the Reaper - A Review

 

    I’ve finally begun to work through all the books I need to read. I got Year of the Reaper as a gift about a year ago and didn’t actually read it until last month, so yeah, baby steps. And, while I have my qualms with the ending of Makiia Lucier’s book, I did find it a rather enjoyable read all in all. But before we get into my review, here’s a quick summary of the premise:

    Three years ago, Lord Cassia was taken prisoner. As one of the many victims of the feud between the kingdoms of Oliveras and Brisa, he has seen hell. A victim of the Brisan labor camps, of gruesome abuse from his captors, and as the lone survivor of the plague that freed him, all he wants is to return home to his brother; to return to his peaceful life now that the war is over.

But, peace doesn’t await him upon his return.

Of course not. If it did, we wouldn’t have a story.

Instead, he uncovers a plot to assassinate the queen, and those closest to her, including the brother he went through hell to return to.

I actually really enjoyed the tone and setting of this story. Oliveras and Brisa have such care put into their history and conflict, leading to a lot of geopolitical depth that I live for in my fantasy novels. It truly feels like a new world. Additionally, I think Lucier did a wonderful job portraying this kingdom trying to recover from a conflict, both the plague and war, instead of showing it dealing with that conflict. I feel like so many fantasy novels tend to only focus on the conflict itself, such as the wars, famine, or plague, having the characters battle with the conflict directly. It was just a nice change of pace to get to experience a story about the healing and recovery a country has to do after such devastating conflict and destruction; and this theme of healing is very well portrayed through our main character Cas, which leads me to another point.

I adored the characters of this novel. They had so much substance to them that made them so well rounded. One of the best examples of this book’s characters is Lena. (Quick warning here, the rest of the review does include a few spoilers). We are first introduced to Lena when she tries to steal Cas’s horse and fails, getting herself stuck in a tree while running from a rabid lynx. Not much later, we are introduced to her as the king’s sister; but she is so much more than that. As it turns out, she’s only the king’s half sister, they had the same father, but her mother was a concubine to the king and she was raised by her grandfather, a historian. Her dream is to follow in her grandfather’s footsteps, and that comes first before anything, even being a love interest to Cas.

Overall, I really enjoyed the book. It had some fun plot twists that I didn’t see coming, great characters, and a setting that was rather different than the ones I’m used to seeing. So even though the ending felt a little rushed, I’d still recommend the book to someone looking for something a little different. But that’s all from me. Thank you for reading, and, until next time!

-Abigail Makela

Isolation at its finest.

     Hi guys! Today I will be discussing Shatter Me, this specific book was written in 2011 by Tahereh Mafi. There will be minimal spoilers in this post, but there will be warnings if a small one comes up! In the past I’ve stayed away from dystopian novels for no reason but Shatter Me was recommended to me by some friends who were hoping I’d read it. To be honest, I’m very glad I did because it also got me out of a reading slump that I was stuck in for a while. 

         

The novel begins with Juliette (the MC) stating that she has been in an asylum for 264 days. No human contact, no speaking for any reason. Just her with her thoughts in a cell. It was kind of crazy putting that into perspective. Relatively quickly we got an idea of what her time in the asylum was like; usually a daily routine with burning bowls of food. She gets a cell mate which developed into a slow friendship building off of trust. Like I said Juliette hasn’t experienced any actual human interaction for a long time so gaining another person living with her is an extreme adaptation on her part. As time goes on, we learn her cellmate's name is Adam and he will play an important role later on in the story. I know this small description sounds boring, but it gets so much better the more you read, the plot twists and detailed descriptions help the reader depict the setting and other characters through Juliette’s perspective.  

    

It should also be noted that there are smaller books referred to as novellas which have I guess filler information in them, they aren’t necessary to read before reading the next book, but they are helpful. As of right now Shatter Me has 6 books in its series (Shatter Me happens to be the 1st book and name of the series), and a 7th book will be available in a couple of months. I’ve read the entire series, and I will say the plot twists that come with each book, and the new characters/backstories being revealed draws the attention of the reader. It was really hard to put these books down to be honest. Reading one after another until the series was finished. Overall Mafi put a lot of work and thought into the series, and I would most definitely recommend more people to read the 1st book if they are interested in the genres dystopian fiction or romance. Overall, I think that might be enough yapping from me, but thank you for reading my blog post!! 

 

-Chloe B. 🦆 

"we accept the love we think we deserve": The Perk of Being a Wallflower - Max B-M.

    The Perks of Being a Wallflower by Stephen Chbosky is one of my favorite movies and probably my favorite book. The story focuses on Charlie, a high school freshman lacking any friends. He befriends a group of seniors and they show him what it feels like to be truly loved, along with meeting a teacher who helps him both academically and socially, providing advice for both. Charlie navigates through a lot of mental health struggles including PTSD from childhood trauma and there’s quite a bit of high school drama (he dates two of the seniors which is a bit creepy but we’re just not going to think about that). 

    The film is very well made and shows a lot of mental health experiences in the way they feel (there’s a panic attack scene that just encapsulates what it feels like). 

    The book is written in the form of letters, sent from Charlie to an anonymous person. This method was apparently suggested to Charlie by his therapist to cope with some of his loneliness after losing his best friend to suicide in the year prior. These letters are always addressed “Dear Friend” with no further information. Charlie says in the first paragraph of the book that he will use other names for the people, or “characters,” in his life to keep whoever is reading his letters from finding him. This shows that whoever he’s writing to is a real person, but he wishes to never know them, and for them to do the same for him. It is unclear if this person writes back or not, and if they do, the contents are not included in the novel, nor are they ever discussed from Charlie’s perspective. 

    I think that this method of writing a book is extremely beautiful. It’s unreliable, but that’s part of what makes it so enjoyable. It shows the character’s experience in the rawest form, where they are telling someone else what happened. Charlie’s ability to communicate directly to the reader makes a lot of what he says and what happens more impactful. 

    If this story was simply told from a third-person perspective, it would lack the utter feeling behind every word communicated. It is truly a beautiful story that encapsulates a multitude of emotions, allowing many to relate to certain parts, whether it be Charlie himself or one of the other complex characters he writes about. 

The novel begins with:

“Dear Friend, 

    I am writing to you because she said you listen and understand and didn’t try to sleep with that person at that party even though you could have. Please don’t try to figure out who she is because then you might figure out who I am, and I really don’t want you to do that. I will call people by different names or generic names because I don’t want you to find me. I didn’t enclose a return address for the same reason. I mean nothing bad by this. Honest.” This shows the layer of reliance put on “friend,” along with Charlie’s deep insecurity and almost embarrassment with the intense wish to remain unknown. 

The novel ends with: 

    “So, if this does end up being my last letter, please believe that things are good with me, and even when they’re not, they will be soon enough. 

    And I will believe the same about you.” This shows the trust built up and the knowledge that Charlie has gained on how to help himself when things are “bad again,” allowing himself to need “friend” less and less as he grows. 

        Anyway, this book is really good and a relatively short read (213 pages but it's not super dense writing or anything). The movie is also great and does a pretty great job of illustrating the original story (it was also written and directed by Stephen Chbosky). Overall, fantastic story and I’ve been obsessing over it for far too long. 

Thanks! 

Cringe Culture, Queer Culture, and Kit Kats

I don’t know how many of you are theater nerds, but if you are, I‘m sure you’ve heard at least one cabaret song. I’m also sure, if you watched the Tony's however long ago, that you’ve seen the backlash Eddie Redmayne has gotten for being too over the top or making viewers of the Tony Award cringe at how weird so many parts of the song were. I agree, this new adaptation is a very cringy, and very difficult to watch musical at some points. I know this is older news, but it's been nagging at my mind since I saw it. This is my take on it:

 Cabaret is a culturally significant piece, depicting the stark reality of the Kit Kat club and life in 1940‘s Germany. It’s meant to make you uncomfortable; the way they make jokes about a gorilla being unfit to be a partner, making you laugh at the notion that a human could love a creature such as that, only for the quiet, hissed “punchline“ to be that it is actually a Jewish woman. The way they depict an orchestra playing happily at the beginning, only for each and every one to be killed by the Nazi regime in the end, shining a light on their limp bodies as (in some adaptations) there is silence where you expected to hear them playing as jovially as they did in the opening number. It isn’t supposed to make you feel good, you’re supposed to be deeply unsettled by every minute of this show. 

In the time Cabaret was written, queer culture was being formed. To the outside world, this was a deeply unsettling notion, and quite often freaked out the people who followed "normal" culture. Classics like Rocky Horror Picture Show, though seen as a humorous play on culture quickly becoming mainstream now, was unsettling to many at the time, even being put out in midnight theaters after receiving such bad reviews from their normal audience. This movie was produced in 1975, and Cabaret was produced 1966, so before Rocky Horror even made a slight change to the view of queer culture. This musical made people uncomfortable, it made them squirm in their seats and check the time. This was intentional. 

Fast forward to today, the old style of Cabaret is celebrated. A wonderful, beautiful achievement, that this notion of queer culture is no longer cast to the side, but bad for Cabaret itself. It had become a fun, eccentric show to go see with your friends. The music they played being what pop music now mostly sounds like, or having stage direction seen as funny more than gross. This is exactly what the artists at the Tony's didn’t want, and so they changed the stage direction. They changed the actors, and they changed the faces — they made sure at every moment, the audience was cringing. They made sure at every second the audience was watching Eddie Redmayne pull a strange face and sound weird they were fighting to shrink back in their seats. You were meant to be uncomfortable. You were meant to feel an underlying, ever present feeling of discomfort as you watch these characters hide from the Nazi regime.