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.
When George Orwell wrote 1984, in 1947, he was predicting 37 years into the future. How accurately did he see what was to come? Now, another 37 years have passed -- is it more of the same?
Orwell wasn't predicting 1984. He even acknowledged that in his book, when his main character stated that no one really knew whether it was actually 1984, or just a date declared by the government.
The title 1984 comes from the year Orwell wrote the book, 1948.
George Orwell didn't write the book as a prediction, but more as a warning. Orwell was a Socialist, and differentiated Socialism from Stalinist Communism. He wrote 1984 to warn against English Socialism (note: IngSoc) from becoming authoritarian.
If you seek Orwell's predictions, he wrote an essay in 1941, The Lion and the Unicorn: Socialism and the English Genius, where he laid out his hopes (prediction) for a Socialist government in the United Kingdom.
***
Also, this thread is pretty much a request to comment on current events. As such, it may wind up being deleted.
Also, this thread is pretty much a request to comment on current events. As such, it may wind up being deleted.
Just a reminder, this is the History forum, where we discuss History (things that happened in the past), not things that are happening now, or recently enough to e considered Current Events (we have a forum for that).
When George Orwell wrote 1984, in 1947, he was predicting 37 years into the future. How accurately did he see what was to come? Now, another 37 years have passed -- is it more of the same?
It has already happened, he modeled it after both Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia, and a bit on life in wartime UK.
Orwell wasn't a science fiction writer, he was a novelist of contemporary political and social commentary.
When George Orwell wrote 1984, in 1947, he was predicting 37 years into the future. How accurately did he see what was to come? Now, another 37 years have passed -- is it more of the same?
No. History does not repeat itself and the future will not be a replication of the past.
The years 1984 to 2021 did not replicate the years 1947 to 1984, and the next 37 will be different yet. Historical events will happen that have never happened before.
Two of the elements I was thinking of were:
Huge expenditure of resources on wasteful military, with no military objective, only psychological and economic, and
Politically correct Newspeak, with persecution/prosecution for Oldspeak.
Two of the elements I was thinking of were:
Huge expenditure of resources on wasteful military, with no military objective, only psychological and economic, and
Politically correct Newspeak, with persecution/prosecution for Oldspeak.
Both were well-apace by the 80s
I did a thesis back in college, years ago, which is why this topic interests me. It never fails to irritate me that people use Orwell's novel to guard against what are typically modern views, some of them political opposites of each other to serve opposing arguments. You can't take the novel out of it's context. Orwell would turn over in his grave.
Well, as was said, Orwell was influenced by contemporary times, he was no Nostradamus. The military in his novel served the perpetual wars with the two main powers (who would be an ally one year and an enemy the next year), with the intention of using surplus resources to keep the people poor. In the novel, England was still being subject to buzz bombs (Julia thought it was by their own government). This was reflective of the 7 years of WWII in the UK and of course the bombing that it endured, and post war UK was poor, broke, and depressed and stayed that way for several decades. Also reflective on the shifting alliances in WWII, for instance Soviet Russia had a treaty with Germany and then was suddenly at war. And also, he saw in events such as the Yalta conference a world ruled by only 3 powers.
Newspeak just speaks to the propaganda occurring in Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany. 2+2=5 is actually a quote from Goring.
If you really are intent on expanding 1984 to modern times, you have to also address what Orwell got wrong in the future course of the world, which is almost everything. He had never traveled to American, never experienced it's magnitude, growing up in depressing industrial post Victorian England. America's post war experience was just the opposite of England. Prosperous and free. Soviet Russia also became a world power but later collapsed under the weight of the cold war. Wars exist, but they are limited in scope. Totalitarian countries still exist, but the west remains free and a society such as pictured by Orwell only survives in limited outcast countries such as North Korea. The world today, arguably, is the most peaceful and prosperous in the history of the world.
Do you think Orwell's book might have served as a warning? But it didn't, largely because Americans thought the finger was pointing at somebody else, while DDE's military-industrial complex was the quicksand under our own feet.
Do you think Orwell's book might have served as a warning? But it didn't, largely because Americans thought the finger was pointing at somebody else, while DDE's military-industrial complex was the quicksand under our own feet.
You really are intent of steering this thread into a certain agenda. Wouldn't it be easier just to bypass the weak 1984 comparisons and start a new thread in the P&C or great debates forum? I wonder if you even read the book 1984 or just relied on some pony-tailed professor to tell you what it means and how you should think.
Anyways, yes 1984 can serve a warning as well, as indicated in a prior post here, it was intended as a warning on where the concept of Social Democracy was heading in the late 1940s (Orwell himself being a proponent of these ideals). But again put into context. The Eisenhower reference, where he warned about the "military industrial complex" is not really applicable here. Eisenhower was warning about the private military and arms industry impacting public policy in order to enrich themselves. In Orwell's novel, there is no private military industrial complex, there is no private industry at all, there is only the state. Free enterprise and capitalism were actually eliminated in the fictional revolution that preceded Ingsoc. Nor is it really to make the rich richer, but to make individuals poor and depressed by eliminating consumerism and wealth, thus enabling the population to be easier to control.
Two of the elements I was thinking of were:
Huge expenditure of resources on wasteful military, with no military objective, only psychological and economic, and
Politically correct Newspeak, with persecution/prosecution for Oldspeak.
Both were well-apace by the 80s
Your bias is showing. And again, you are begging for the thread to be closed or deleted with your leading comments.
"Wasteful" in relation to modern military, or in fact many military expenditures throughout the ages, is often a short sighted pejorative. The "wasteful" expenditures on space in the 1960s have provided the satellite link I am using to communicate here. THose expenditures have provided the backbone for current commerce, navigation, and greater security. Roman military roads formed the backbone of that civilization's land commerce. I could go on for pages, but the takeaway is that the competition for military advantage is and has been the greatest driver of technology humanity has ever known. There is waste in development of anything.
Military objectives are often opaque to the general public, and even those in the military except at the very top of the chain of command. Ultimately, I have a hard time thinking of ANY military objective that isn't in some way economic in nature. Hitler didn't want the world so that Wagner would be better appreciated.
Psychology and manipulation of minds for fun and profit is again rooted in the distant past, and if you think the military is the only practitioner, you have never heard of W. R. Hearst or the idea of "religion."
The warnings of 1984 had already come full fruit long before that date. I remember reading the book in school and noting that fact.
I would argue that social commentary always has been the real purpose of science fiction. The "science" can often be the sugar coating of the pill that is hard to swallow otherwise.
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.
And again, you are begging for the thread to be closed or deleted with your leading comments.
