Well.
That was. Something.
I know I'm suppose to fell horrified by the savagery of June, Emily and other former handmaids beating Fred to death.
I know he deserved it and I know their act of savagery was suppose to be cathartic.
I even understand that there was little chance for restorative justice against Fred's actions, even if he wasn't giving them "intel" (more like half-baked truths wrapped in lies).
And yet. It didn't feel right.
I'm not sure how to express how I feel about it. I certainly felt June's fury over Fred potentially getting to walk scot free after everything he did, regardless of her testimony and the testimonies of others. I certainly felt her growing frustration with Mark Tuello and how he kept trying to say getting information from Fred was for the greater good. I felt her frustration when others tried to tell June that she needed to let go of Fred and move forward, even when she said she wanted to but couldn't.
I was grateful (even if it felt unlikely) that June was able to reach out to Joseph and arrange an in-person meeting to negotiate a prisoner exchange to force Mark's hand (indeed Fred was not worth more than all of those women). He might not have gotten the punishments he deserved from Canada and the rest of the world, but at least Gilead would've made him suffer. But even that wasn't quite right.
The one thing that did resonate for me was June's answer to Emily about what June wanted: She wanted Fred to feel the fear that she felt. The fear on that fateful day when she was running away with Hannah and then to have her daughter ripped from her arms. That felt visceral. I, too, wanted him to feel that fear.
And yet. That actual moment didn't feel satisfying.
Perhaps that's the point. Even if June doesn't seem to think so.
Would you have preferred the novel's solution to Fred? He was part of a purge that takes place "off-camera" at some point long after the novel's main events.
People have been waiting for four seasons for some kind of meaningful retribution against Fred. It's more meaningful if it comes from his victims instead of some Gilead court that could have exonerated him for some bizarre reason (as they did Lawrence, who by Gilead law should have been executed for his actions).
She's martyred him, hasn't she? For Gilead's long-term political purposes, she might as well have.
Doesn't mean she was wrong. But they'll try to spin it for domestic and international purposes that way.
Of course they will. It's like the end of the 1990 movie, when the Fred-is-a-martyr propaganda was going out over the Gilead TV channel, assuring the faithful that Commander Waterford's murderer and the Mayday rebels would be caught and hanged.
Keep in mind that the same people own the rights to the movie and the novel. That's why parts of the series have the same word-for-word dialogue from the movie and some things are a bit different from the novel.
Vigilante justice isn't justice. What June did was horrific and immoral on multiple levels, even if it feels justified or understandable. It was still vigilante justice. Taking the law into their own hands. Yes, the law had let them down but, at the same time, rule of law is what keeps society from chaos.
It was justice by Gilead standards. Fred raped handmaids who were not his, therefore he was executed in a Particicution ceremony. I bet he was wishing he'd taken June's offer of being shot, when he realized the women intended to beat him to death the way they'd been forced to beat other men to death.
I'd like to know where that bridge is.
I did some map googling, and I think it would likely be one of those backwater (no pun intended) crossings either over the Niagara River or a tributary of it. There are many odd undefended crossings along the border. In one place the border is marked by a row of potted plants. In others, the border actually runs through someone's house.
For security reasons, I doubt this was filmed at an actual crossing point. Just because there isn't an official security checkpoint, don't assume it's not under surveillance. I suspect the show just made it up.
Too bad they couldn't have worked Hannah into the exchange as well as those 20 resistance fighters.
That would have screwed up the showrunners' plan to segue into
The Testaments.
It's undoubtedly propaganda. Maybe there is some truth to it but the numbers are skewed because of the size of Gilead. I don't remember if the show has established its population size but that might have a factor in it. Plus the hyperfocus on getting women pregnant by any means necessary, which means there isn't any level of choice and all viable women are "participating," whereas who knows how many women around the world are trying to get pregnant.
But not all viable women are participating. The Jezebels are not intended to get pregnant, though some of them can (Moira, for example). Ditto some of the women in the Colonies, though their fertility probably goes downhill pretty quickly due to the toxins they're exposed to.
I am curious how the next season will play out with what seems like the main protagonist gone. Can Serena Joy carry the entire villainy by herself? Yes, there still is Joseph, Lydia, and all of Gilead; but Fred's been there from the start.
They can easily create more villains. Commander Winslow, for example, is one they created. He's not in the original novel. Lawrence is a "moral grey area" character. We never know which way he's going to jump, and some of his actions have been seen as villainous... until we find out his reasons.
Yeah, there's that, too. I just meant that there was a reasonable in-universe reason for June not to do that at this time.
You mean antagonist.
But to answer your question, I think Serena can and already does carry villainy by herself. Without a doubt, everything Fred did was horrifying, disgusting, and I was constantly yelling at him. But I was doing that even more so with Serena despite doing less direct violence against June. Serena is a very self-righteous, self-entitled holier-than-thou tyrant.
Just look at the attitude she copped against Mark in this episode outside of the conference room during Fred's interview about intel. She acted like she and Fred were the victims in all of this and they should be treated like royalty. She's been acting like that for four seasons on her own, only sometimes held back Fred simply because of Gilead's staunch patriarchy. But now on her own and away from Gilead's immediate influence? She'll be even more insufferable than before.
Serena has no problem being a villain. She's manipulative in the novel, but nowhere near as outright cruel as she is in the TV show. Of course TV-Serena is much younger than novel-Serena, and novel-Serena was a televangelist, rather than a writer who went on speaking tours.
I enjoyed the middle episodes, I was emotionally hooked, and it felt so good to see June reunited with Luke, Moira, Rita and Emily. On the other hand, I don't like June, haven't liked her for quite some time, actually. She uses people, uses the allure she has to pull people in just to leave them behind (at best) when they're no longer of use to her. Her words to Jeanine were despicable, her influence in Moira's group destructive etc. I get where she's coming from, but her way of obsession, vengeance and pure hatred isn't the way towards healing. She'll always find a new target to focus on. Fred might be gone now, but there's still Serena (who's arguably even worse than Fred, manipulative in her own right), Lydia etc.
There's no requirement for protagonists to be nice people. They're merely the main character(s) whose pov is/are how we're shown the events of the story.
And to me the whole situation with Fred didn't make any sense. First of all, why is he so important in delivering intel - wouldn't Nick who's after all still part of the hierarchy make more sense as whistle blower? He'd do anything for June, establish her as his handler and get current info about Gilead's movements. Secondly, the whole idea of letting the Waterfords live out their lives in the open is ridiculous - the whole setup of their imprisonment was ridiculous, them having contact with each other etc.
Nick is at least a double agent, possibly a triple agent. Add to that any personal agenda he has, which likely includes keeping June as safe as he can, given her tendency to bulldoze ahead on her own and damn the consequences for anyone else. Yes, there's a lot he could say. But he's more valuable right where he is. And as suddenly as he was made a Commander, it could be taken away again. He might be at the top of one of Gilead's departments, but he's nowhere near the top of the entire heap.
And now we have those 22 women who're exchanged for Fred - did this actually happen (i.e. were those 22 women actual prisoners or volunteers of MayDay to pose as prisoners) or did Nick and Joseph just pull the wool over Mark's eyes? Because if it did happen as an official prisoner exchange, then wouldn't Gilead notice Nick and Joseph's involvement, leading to them losing their insight into what's happening?
They appeared to be wearing Martha uniforms. We know that the Marthas have a wide-reaching network that functions whether they're actively involved in Mayday or not.
The other thing is: How exactly is it determined who gets to be a wife and who a handmaid? With her now being pregnant Serena kind of proves to be fertile, so she could be "demoted" to handmaid if she ever returns to Gilead... but what of Esther? How did she become a wife in the first place? In the beginning the handmaids were girls/women who already had children or otherwise determined fertile and who had some kind of sordid past (in Gilead's eyes)... But how are the "new" handmaids recruited (other than Esther)?
Esther would have been a Daughter. Daughters become either Econowives or Wives, depending on the status of their parents.
We don't know for sure how they get the younger handmaids. As I said before, they might import them from other districts that have a temporary surplus. They would have to have done that to replenish the 'stock' when Ofglen #2 killed so many in her suicide bombing.
This brings us to the question of why Eden was executed instead of being taken to the Red Centre. It would seem that if a woman commits adultery, the penalty is death (drowning in Eden's case, the Colonies in the case of the Wife who was poisoned by Emily). If a woman rebels somewhat, it seems that she's still deemed fit to be a handmaid if she's fertile, but if she's an incorrigible rebel, she's offered a choice between the Colonies or Jezebel's (provided she's considered attractive enough for a brothel).
And Lydia and Jeanine... I really hope at some point Lydia gets what she deserves, and Jeanine's ready to mete out that punishment.
Overall, good season with clear emotional highlights - but quite a distressing ending, not only in the glee that was seen in the eyes of the women, but also in the neglect of the bigger picture.
It wasn't a nice ending, but it was realistic, in how they dealt with Fred. The novel explains the psychology that went into developing the Particicution ceremony. The Handmaids are captives, forced to be submissive and never express their own opinions. Giving them a periodic outlet for whatever resentment or hate they might feel is a way of ensuring they won't snap and murder their Commander and his family.
Fred's a former commander in custody. He's someone they can interrogate. Well could interrogate. Nick, on the other hand, should be pretty much inaccessible. He's still in Gilead. Nick appears to be cooperative with June alone, but that's most likely very limited. The ease of contact June has been able to have with Nick and Joseph is what has surprised me or I thought might strain credibility.
The only thing that makes sense is that someone in authority is making it possible for these calls to go through. And remember that Gilead does have internet access. It's just not accessible for anyone who isn't a Commander.
I'm actually fine with the gilded cage and relative freedoms the Waterford's had in Canada. They weren't prisoners of war from Canada's point of view. They weren't even really prisoners until Fred was transferred to US custody. It's politics. It's nebulous. The rest of the world is not at war with Gilead. They haven't committed any crimes toward the rest of the world and the crimes against humanity that Gilead is guilty of isn't that easy to prosecute. From the world's viewpoint, the United States was overthrown by a civil war.
They've committed crimes against the countries whose citizens happened to be in the U.S. when the Sons of Jacob took over and who couldn't leave.
A thing to continue considering: Canada, Mexico, and the Caribbean and Central and South American nations are all at greater risk to varying degrees, given the history of the US and Gilead.
And how are those resistance forces able to achieve and hold whatever gains they've made against Gilead up to "now"? Yes, that's a political/supply chain question.
It's not likely anything the American writers would think about, but I would hope that if Gilead decides to invade, that the major Commonwealth countries would help Canada. After all, we did our part in two world wars, plus plenty of peacekeeping missions.
I'm curious why Jeanine and Emily were mutilated, but June wasn't overtly - she has always been a trouble maker, so why not sow her lips together or cut her hamstrings that she can't run away... actually I have been wondering about that since we saw those handmaids in Washington), so what purpose would returning to Gilead have at this point in the story? What could she accomplish inside Gilead right now?
Janine was mutilated because Aunt Lydia a) is a thin-skinned old hag; and b) decided to use Janine as a horrifying example to the other women of what the consequences would be if any of
them talked back.
Emily was mutilated in an effort to discourage her from seeking out other women for sex. The reasoning was that if she could no longer feel pleasure, she wouldn't have a reason to break the rules. Oh, and because Lydia is a vindictive bitch, as well.
June did not escape physical torture. She was tied down and her bare feet were whipped on multiple occasions. Of course that's nowhere on par with the loss of an eye or clitoris, but at least she didn't completely escape physical consequences.
Even Lydia doesn't approve of how the Handmaids are treated in Washington. The show has to address that at some point.
I'm just afraid Serena isn't as strong and intriguing villain as Fred. We will wait and see.
Is Tuello falling in love with Serena?
Tuello has been attracted to Serena since the first season. Why, I have no idea. At first I thought he was just acting, to manipulate her into giving up information. But later he seemed to actually be falling for her, and that was the end of any liking for him I had. He's an idiot.
Where were the guards at the border at the end? Did Nick pull them all back? All those former handmaids had no problem entering the forbidden zone or whatever it was and chasing Fred. They had a much easier time crossing that border than we ever saw when they were trying to escape Gilead.
Yes, Nick would have pulled the guards back. There was a line of dialogue referencing this. He's in charge of the Eyes, so he can station them wherever he wants.
The women who crossed the bridge were wearing Martha uniforms. I very much doubt that Lawrence would agree to give up handmaids.
The former handmaids who helped kill Fred were part of whatever deal June swung with Nick and Lawrence. Look at it this way: Gilead was not happy with Fred. June and the former handmaids were not happy with Fred. Nick was not happy with Fred. All of them wanted Fred to be dead. So Nick and Lawrence made it possible for Fred to be caught out in the buffer zone between Canada and Gilead where the border is murky, and the women treated Fred to the experience of what a Particicution is like. Their actions saved Gilead the trouble of making Fred dead, and everyone goes home happy (or at least with the sense that justice was at least partially served).
I've seen it suggested that June has left Luke for Nick. Sorry, I'm just not getting that. Nick's in Gilead. June is not going to return to Gilead and live as a commander's wife.
June has emotionally left Luke. Luke really has no clue in hell what traumas June has suffered, and it's the sort of thing that's really impossible to explain to someone who hasn't experienced more than a fraction of it. Yes, Luke saw a townful of dead people strung up in a church - big deal. June saw dead Handmaids and Marthas and Econopeople hanging from lamp posts and the Wall every day, and was forced to participate in some of those hangings herself. She's had to bury women with her own bare hands. How could Luke ever come close to understanding how those things would have affected and changed her?
There's a persistent theory floating around that her baby is his and not Fred's. Which would not only explain how an impotent impregnated her, but also why Serena feels so damn confident in acting so self-righteous at Tuello every chance she got (I mean, beyond her regular inflated ego).
It's been stated in interviews that Fred is the father of Serena's baby.
Not physically, I agree, but I do think her heart is with Nick now. Like I said before, it's not something I ever bought but the show has continuously pushed that idea forward every time they've met.
In the novel, Offred states that she did not consider her first time with Nick to be a betrayal of Luke, since she was doing it under Serena's orders. And for the times after... well, in the novel and movie, Luke is killed off from the get-go. She might have felt some guilt at first, but the fact is that even though June is pretty unlikeable at this point, she is still human and humans have emotional needs. June needed Nick to hold on to her sanity. He was the one person in Gilead who she felt actually gave a damn if she lived or died. That's a powerful kind of bond people can have.
