Very Powerful Melissa, such a great breakdown on many things I have not thought of for years. You could be describing the situation in a few countries now.
This is good. He went to fight fascists and then became wanted by the Communists who had the same objectives but would not tolerate anything that looked counter-revolutionary. Deeply ironic. In '1984' the three main world powers are at war and change allegiances but each time they do, the past is reinvented so hide the fact it was ever any different. His books are largely concerned with the fungibility of truth and how it is traded and converted. The state, culture and class crush the individual, by first making them the enemy. Things are never as they seem and repeatedly, idealism and rebelliousness give way to circumstantial acceptance, sometimes complete conversion. It is what he observes in his non-fiction and it is a theme that recurs throughout all his fiction. There always seems to be a sad recognition that it was all for nothing somewhere near the end.
Reporting and propaganda are difficult to distinguish during war because information is also a weapon. This is also why factual reporting can make a person an enemy of the state or be made to appear treasonous. I think that made him realise how dangerous that could be in peacetime too - 'Aspidistra' explores perceived hypocrisies in advertising for example. Much of what we know about this is what he showed us. That is why we are still talking about Orwell.
Well said—and what makes it even more concerning is the perpetual war that Orwell also recognized for exactly what it was.
It makes sense since he saw the manipulation from all angles—as the reader who recognized that something wasn’t right and also, at a certain point in his career, the person spouting it.
He’s a remarkable guy—with basically all of the issues he talks about, his life experience offered him a clarity most people don’t have.
War always embodies many types of self-interest that is nothing to do with what the conflict is supposedly about. 1984 epitomises that because the never-ending war was an instrument of domestic power. It was the focus of external hate and the pretext for internal suppression. The truth was no longer fixed. To your second point - that was one of his themes, viz. the individual who rebels gets re-absorbed by the system. He notices it in the non-fiction of Wigan Pier, Down and Out and in his essays where people are trapped in their situation. Those along with Catalonia and the misunderstood semi-fictional Burmese Days were pieces of journalism. The pull of the system over the individual happens in Animal Farm, 1984, Aspidistra and Coming up for Air. On your last point. I think the lack of clarity that exists today (in the West) stems from a lack of real life experiences and the ability to curate an artificial one. It was only a few decades ago that such clarity was commonplace. What was unusual in Orwell amongst his contemporaries was the empathy. In my experience, the harsh reality in certain regions of the world, seems to provide clarity and destroy empathy.
Very Powerful Melissa, such a great breakdown on many things I have not thought of for years. You could be describing the situation in a few countries now.
Thanks so much, Albert! It’s crazy how everything repeats, and yet all these conflicts appear to be motivated by change.
So True.
This is good. He went to fight fascists and then became wanted by the Communists who had the same objectives but would not tolerate anything that looked counter-revolutionary. Deeply ironic. In '1984' the three main world powers are at war and change allegiances but each time they do, the past is reinvented so hide the fact it was ever any different. His books are largely concerned with the fungibility of truth and how it is traded and converted. The state, culture and class crush the individual, by first making them the enemy. Things are never as they seem and repeatedly, idealism and rebelliousness give way to circumstantial acceptance, sometimes complete conversion. It is what he observes in his non-fiction and it is a theme that recurs throughout all his fiction. There always seems to be a sad recognition that it was all for nothing somewhere near the end.
Reporting and propaganda are difficult to distinguish during war because information is also a weapon. This is also why factual reporting can make a person an enemy of the state or be made to appear treasonous. I think that made him realise how dangerous that could be in peacetime too - 'Aspidistra' explores perceived hypocrisies in advertising for example. Much of what we know about this is what he showed us. That is why we are still talking about Orwell.
Well said—and what makes it even more concerning is the perpetual war that Orwell also recognized for exactly what it was.
It makes sense since he saw the manipulation from all angles—as the reader who recognized that something wasn’t right and also, at a certain point in his career, the person spouting it.
He’s a remarkable guy—with basically all of the issues he talks about, his life experience offered him a clarity most people don’t have.
War always embodies many types of self-interest that is nothing to do with what the conflict is supposedly about. 1984 epitomises that because the never-ending war was an instrument of domestic power. It was the focus of external hate and the pretext for internal suppression. The truth was no longer fixed. To your second point - that was one of his themes, viz. the individual who rebels gets re-absorbed by the system. He notices it in the non-fiction of Wigan Pier, Down and Out and in his essays where people are trapped in their situation. Those along with Catalonia and the misunderstood semi-fictional Burmese Days were pieces of journalism. The pull of the system over the individual happens in Animal Farm, 1984, Aspidistra and Coming up for Air. On your last point. I think the lack of clarity that exists today (in the West) stems from a lack of real life experiences and the ability to curate an artificial one. It was only a few decades ago that such clarity was commonplace. What was unusual in Orwell amongst his contemporaries was the empathy. In my experience, the harsh reality in certain regions of the world, seems to provide clarity and destroy empathy.