A Comment on 1984

[ThomWV]

My two favorite writers are John Locke and George Orwell - that should tell you where I'm coming from.

Over in the General Discussion Forum there is a post about the CIA's involvement in the making of a version of the movie 1984. The post explains that the movie purposefully distorted the point of the book and gave some evidence to support the argument. A lot of people responded. I read most of the trailing posts and it seemed to me that few, if indeed any, of the people who were responding could possibly have actually read the book.

Some of the more remarkable reviews of the work had this opinion of the author's purpose; 'the book is about trading freedom for security'. Now think about that for a minute if you are one of the lucky ones who actually have read it. In the book the lead character, Winston, snakes his way through a life as insecure as any imaginable. People are disappeared all the time in the book and in fact much of the dialog concerns when and where it might happen to our hero. Indeed, it is only those people who have given up their freedoms who actually lose their security - the lowly people outside the political system portrayed in the book in fact have great security and complete freedom. See what I mean? They got it exactly backward.

So I'm sitting here wondering how it is that a person can tell us they have read this great work and then get the point of the book exactly backward wrong? What is the book about? Its about the frailty of history and that language defines thought, it is a warning to us about how easily and completely we can be manipulated. The book is a tragedy. I guess what really bothers me is that in these people's minds the book has morphed into something to support a popular political memem when in fact the book had nothing at all to do with it.

[Dhalgren]

1. I agree with you. And the book is a horror story.

Fear is a major character in the book and torture is public policy (and extends to daily life). What is real becomes a matter of obedience and rebellion is the simple act of saving some bit of evidence, some scrap of trash that proves that what is was not always so. The tenuous hold we each have on who we are and where we are and what we are about is a terrifying backdrop to the whole. "1984" should be required reading for everyone...more now than ever...


"We are the dead..."

[Birthmark]

2. "You are the dead."

About shit a brick at that point in the book. (I was about 14 at the time.)

Still gives me the willies.

[ThomWV]

3. For me it was the utter futility of the final line

"He loved Big Brother."

[pitohui]

4. me too what a great line and what a great book

stephen king could not write more scary than this

[Dhalgren]

5. Love could not be sustained, because the very fact of real love

was revolutionary. Love could not be brought under the government or Party. Also the "hardness" of the governmental reality, it kills, it crushes, it brings into line; the merely human is so ephemeral, so unretainable...

[Lost-in-FL]

6. I just started reading this book

It is an amazing book and contrary to what some people say it isn't scarry to me... why? Cause to a lesser degree we are currently living like this. We are told what to read, who to vote for, what to eat, etc. We are told by Bush the economy is doing good but we are in fact in a recession. Nothing is shocking to me anymore.

Children being spies is a possibility that is plain sick, the public hangings, the "Two minute hate". etc. This book is addictive and sick. This is by far the best book I have read in a long time (I don't read fiction, but decided to read it because of all the references to it here in DU).

[Daveparts]

7. If you mix

1984, Brave New World with the movie Brazil you have our modern American
existence. "How do you account for the terrorists 14 year bombing campaign?"

"Beginners luck!"

[Forrest Greene]

8. This Might Be Where The Mistake Lies

The mistake in "...this opinion of the author's purpose; 'the book is about trading freedom for security,' " that is.

To some people, it seems being wrapped in the steely arms of a relentless, ubiquitous, omnipotent Big Brother _is_ security, believe it or not. Or at least it suffices as security for them. No need to think, to feel, no need to bear the awful responsibilities of freedom. Winston just wasn't that way, until the end of the book.

Imagine considering life in a constantly-surveilled, social / political / emotional paralysis as "security..." You can even see, sort of, how the conclusion might be arrived at: if "security" means nothing bad can happen, why then, a situation like paralysis -- where nothing at _all_ can happen -- is the ultimate security! It's just good old clumsy, lazy, unimaginative all-or-nothing thinking, helped along, of course, by the Ministry of Truth. The same sort of thing as thinking fear equals respect, or war equals peace.

Hope you've enjoyed the collection "The Orwell Reader: Fiction, Essays, and Reportage." He's one of the clearest, best writers in English I've ever encountered, not to mention his heart being in the right place.

[taylor225]

9. i agree with you.

George Orwell really is one of my favorite writers. I have to admit that you really got the meaning of the book 1984 just right.Mostly the part about language. Language defines us, and has the ability to grant freedom or take it away. People who don't get the message have either never read it, or are just stupid.