Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's a very good, and important, book. I wouldn't necessarily categorize it as an "enjoyable" book, unless one considers reading about a nightmarish, out-of-control government enjoyable. Nonetheless, I think that it should be mandatory reading for everyone so they can reflect on what can happen when a government controls every aspect of life. The scenarios played out in 1984 probably seemed unrealistic, if not impossible, when the book first came out. It is still relevant today because society has "evolved" to a point where the situations in the book are not only possbile, but seem almost inevitable imo.
I was around 15 when I read it and honestly can't say if I liked it much, my memory of the book's words on the pages no longer register in my brain at lest not as of these past few years. I do remember is seemed radical at the time or some such thinking. I do remember being in the presence of my sister when I was holding on to a copy, I think she gave it to me and we were walking through a park or down some street at dusk.
It had a stirring and profound impact on me as a teenager and I think along with 'Homage To Catalonia' it was Orwell's most powerful work. 'Animal Farm' was complete and utter tosh, 'The Road To Wigan Pier' a typically condescending and naive middle England perception of the working class and despite his supposedly left-wing leanings Orwell was a very much contradictory character who couldn't help but succumb to the prejudices of his upbringing and hereditary privilege despite his courage in trying to raise his moral compass above class barriers.
He said in 'Homage To Catalonia' that "An Englishman would rather cut off his hand than say such a thing" when a Spanish soldier remarked on how much better trained and brave the French soldiers were but he said it in pity rather than admiration which is why I personally think he missed the point when it came to Karl Marx and socialism.
The "two minutes of hate" he speaks of has parallels with the way the British media depicts the vulnerable, disabled and poor and it seems we are permanently at war but now the "war on drugs" and "the war on terror" has replaced the cold war with Russia and China whose friendship we now embrace as much as we overlook their authoritarian transgressions now that these transgressions fly under the banner of free market fundamentalism rather than communism as the ideology of hate.
What people forget though is how radical Orwell was. He thought the Atlee revolution was meek and too mild and concessionary and yet he is remembered as a beacon of light and salvation for progression in social mobility, housing and working conditions as well as the foundation of the revered NHS.
The most repugnant feature about Orwell though was his innate prejudices. He despised the Irish and could barely conceal his contempt at their affront to his country's 'Great Empire' which whilst he felt ill at ease with some of its consequences couldn't unshackle the reasoning that 'the British' instilled a certain discipline and order in its inferior subordinates who could only be viewed with contempt.
The 'O'Brien' character in 1984 his most blatant expression of his antipathy towards the Irish. Mostly of course because this British oppression happened to be taking place so very close to home. So very inconvenient. But as Sean O'Casey (Orwell's arch nemesis who outraged Orwell with his razor sharp wit) always simply stated "the true very often are".
The right have hijacked and revised 1984's theme as one of Orwell's road to Damascus conversion from blithering bleeding heart liberal to stoic realist of the conservative type. But this of course is nonsense. Orwell saw flaws in totalitarianism of any form and knew the evil's of totalitarian Stalinist dictatorship had nothing to do with the flaws of socialism as an ideology in its own right.
Orwell flip flopped like a hyperventilating chameleon it is true but to portray 1984 as a condemnation of socialism would be a mistake. Orwell still perceived (as stated above) Atlee's Government to be to centre ground, mild and meek. The reality is Orwell was very much a socialist, but one who never completely outgrew his socially conservative prejudices.
He was a half-hearted monarchist for instance, and having been raised in privilege failed to distinguish the crippling divisions of Britain's elitist class system with the huge disparity and inequality that ironically today has profound reverberations of the text of 1984.
The political and media establishment have never been so entwined under the symbol of one school tie.
Last edited by Fear&Whiskey; 02-02-2014 at 12:02 AM..
Mr. Orwell...one of the most astute and incisive critical writers (and perhaps most important.. thinker) of our time noting as one writer put it the 'smelly little orthodoxies of the day'. And one of those was the British left's dalliance with Stalin and the other were those French intellectuals taken in with Hitler. And I'm not sure how, when he approached death, he viewed the future of man and his quest for 'truths. For when we think of Orwell we pick up his image of that 'boot stamping on a human face perhaps forever. His vision on that, of course, was all in '1984'. Things we'll never see: any image or photo of Orwell smiling. There are none. And it was admirable to see Evelyn Waugh, an alleged Brit curmudgeon who also never missed a chance to comment on their modern day, that Orwell 'had an unusually high moral sense and respect for justice and truth'. As for how orwell described himself: He was not a 'socialist but a radical...in his passion for liberty and intellectual honesty'. He lies in Sutton Courtenay churchyard south of Oxford...Eric Arthur Blair. RIP.
Mr. Orwell...one of the most astute and incisive critical writers (and perhaps most important.. thinker) of our time noting as one writer put it the 'smelly little orthodoxies of the day'. And one of those was the British left's dalliance with Stalin and the other were those French intellectuals taken in with Hitler. And I'm not sure how, when he approached death, he viewed the future of man and his quest for 'truths. For when we think of Orwell we pick up his image of that 'boot stamping on a human face perhaps forever. His vision on that, of course, was all in '1984'. Things we'll never see: any image or photo of Orwell smiling. There are none. And it was admirable to see Evelyn Waugh, an alleged Brit curmudgeon who also never missed a chance to comment on their modern day, that Orwell 'had an unusually high moral sense and respect for justice and truth'. As for how orwell described himself: He was not a 'socialist but a radical...in his passion for liberty and intellectual honesty'. He lies in Sutton Courtenay churchyard south of Oxford...Eric Arthur Blair. RIP.
It was the British right's dalliance with fascism that troubled Orwell far more actually. And his ominous warnings about Britain's appeasement of fascism during the 30's sadly came to pass. Those quaint green fields of England that would only be roused from their ambivalence to holocaust and human savagery by the sound of German bombs.
It appears to me that you want to see the George Orwell that you want to see rather than the socialist he actually was. You aren't seriously trying to suggest he was becoming a conservative are you?
It appears to me that you want to see the George Orwell that you want to see rather than the socialist he actually was. You aren't seriously trying to suggest he was becoming a conservative are you?
Now that's interesting. I tell you I kind of agree with those who say he is tough to 'categorize'. He doesn't come across as say 'doctrinal' in his political writings. They are not spoken from the 'mountain'. His writings appear to be suffused with critical musings and opinions on the events of his day. Yet he like some of those in the right wing, i.e. Waugh, he didn't like what he saw in the future, a modernity affected by the actions and thoughts of those 'dicators' where tradition was thrown aside. Orwell saw that 'the common people are still living in the world of absolute good and evil from which the intellectuals have long escaped'. And for Orwell he revered individual freedom. I guess of course he'd vote socialist but underneath there's something else there with the latter and believing in traditions.
I enjoyed 1984 for what it is - it won't be a read to give you the warm and fuzzies. It helps to appreciate the book if you don't just try to plow right through it.
I don't think I would take it on a trip for pleasure, maybe a work related trip. Just my $0.02.
I enjoyed 1984 for what it is - it won't be a read to give you the warm and fuzzies. It helps to appreciate the book if you don't just try to plow right through it.
I don't think I would take it on a trip for pleasure, maybe a work related trip. Just my $0.02.
Pretty much my take on 1984. I don't give a fig about his political leanings or English upbringing. The book still has a powerful appeal to readers especially as we live in a world dominated by the Patriot Act and a government willing to shove laws down our throats even though most of the public doesn't want them.
My main beef with 1984 is every English class I had from 8th-12th grade assigned the book to the point where I hated the book. It wasnt till I got older I appreciated it again.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I do remember is seemed radical at the time or some such thinking. I do remember being in the presence of my sister when I was holding on to a copy, I think she gave it to me and we were walking through a park or down some street at dusk. 
?
