I hadn't thought about it until reading this but I guess I my worldview puts me in the Dickens ("...considered the injustices of the world to be moral issues rather than political ones.") camp with a side of Miller (as Orwell describes him; ".... a sort of Whitman among the corpses.") Politics is downstream of culture. Paraphrasing James Freeman Clarke; the statesman thinks of the next generation while politician is a man who thinks of how much money and power he can steal. He thinks of the next election as a way to gain more time to steal. There are few, if any statesmen today, thieves, murders we have aplenty.
Downstream of culture, ethics, morality or lack of such. Lack of such in society is of course reflected in the elected, anointed, appointed 'leaders'. Can't have honest politicians without an ethical body politic, a ethical, moral populace.
As I noted in my first sentence, I hadn't thought, so thanks much for the food for thought, looking forward to the next hundred and sixty chapters!
"Can't have honest politicians without an ethical body politic, an ethical, moral populace"
Well said. The more history I read, the more I see that the quality of the people who take power is way more important than the system of power that is put in place. (I guess this would put me firmly in the Dickens camp as well.)
Excellent start to the book Melissa. I agree with your take in regards to Miller - he wrote from a very hedonistic perspective, his stories were based on a very visceral and 'in the moment' way of life; any political commentary would have felt forced and out of place in that context. His description of Miller in 1936 makes me think that, were Miller alive today, he may be a proponent of accelerationism. That indifference to the coming cataclysm has an accelerationist tone.
Interesting point about accelerationism. You might be right—and actually, I wonder if Orwell himself would've been a proponent of it (the chapter I have planned for next week shows that he wasn't exactly against the idea of a bloody revolution if the ends justified the means...
Good job, Melissa. The other great literary dystopian vision of the era was, of course, Aldous Huxley's Brave New World. My essay, The Rise of Huxwell (https://open.substack.com/pub/qolrm/p/the-rise-of-huxwell?r=7hc45&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web) describes the rise of a 21st-century totalitarian state that combined the compliance mechanism of state-sponsored default addiction per Huxley's Brave New World with the enforcement mechanisms of 24/7 surveillance, linguistic thought control, state-manufactured mass formation psychosis, perpetual war, and institutional tyranny of George Orwell's 1984. I would be interested in hearing your thoughts about it.
I’m really looking forward to reading your article. I think you’re totally right that the situation today combines elements from both novels (makes sense—the writers were talking about different phenomena, but all these elements existed simultaneously). I’m really interested in seeing what you make of it. Expect a response sometime tomorrow or the day after.
Thanks so much for reading. This is the first time I’ve attempted a project like this, and the positive feedback is really encouraging. :)
I know very little about any of these Authors, or the times they were living in and their influences, this is a great intro!
Glad you enjoyed :) Thanks for reading!
I hadn't thought about it until reading this but I guess I my worldview puts me in the Dickens ("...considered the injustices of the world to be moral issues rather than political ones.") camp with a side of Miller (as Orwell describes him; ".... a sort of Whitman among the corpses.") Politics is downstream of culture. Paraphrasing James Freeman Clarke; the statesman thinks of the next generation while politician is a man who thinks of how much money and power he can steal. He thinks of the next election as a way to gain more time to steal. There are few, if any statesmen today, thieves, murders we have aplenty.
Downstream of culture, ethics, morality or lack of such. Lack of such in society is of course reflected in the elected, anointed, appointed 'leaders'. Can't have honest politicians without an ethical body politic, a ethical, moral populace.
As I noted in my first sentence, I hadn't thought, so thanks much for the food for thought, looking forward to the next hundred and sixty chapters!
"Can't have honest politicians without an ethical body politic, an ethical, moral populace"
Well said. The more history I read, the more I see that the quality of the people who take power is way more important than the system of power that is put in place. (I guess this would put me firmly in the Dickens camp as well.)
Thanks for following along! Glad you enjoyed :)
Excellent piece, as was the introduction. Thank you, I look forward to reading more.
Thanks so much for reading :) Looking forward to you following along!
A fascinating instalment, I’m looking forward to next Tuesday
Glad to hear it! Thanks for reading :)
Excellent start to the book Melissa. I agree with your take in regards to Miller - he wrote from a very hedonistic perspective, his stories were based on a very visceral and 'in the moment' way of life; any political commentary would have felt forced and out of place in that context. His description of Miller in 1936 makes me think that, were Miller alive today, he may be a proponent of accelerationism. That indifference to the coming cataclysm has an accelerationist tone.
Interesting point about accelerationism. You might be right—and actually, I wonder if Orwell himself would've been a proponent of it (the chapter I have planned for next week shows that he wasn't exactly against the idea of a bloody revolution if the ends justified the means...
Thanks for reading :)
Good job, Melissa. The other great literary dystopian vision of the era was, of course, Aldous Huxley's Brave New World. My essay, The Rise of Huxwell (https://open.substack.com/pub/qolrm/p/the-rise-of-huxwell?r=7hc45&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web) describes the rise of a 21st-century totalitarian state that combined the compliance mechanism of state-sponsored default addiction per Huxley's Brave New World with the enforcement mechanisms of 24/7 surveillance, linguistic thought control, state-manufactured mass formation psychosis, perpetual war, and institutional tyranny of George Orwell's 1984. I would be interested in hearing your thoughts about it.
Your article sparked a lot of thought, so I decided to write a post about it. You can read it here: https://thinkingman.substack.com/p/huxley-vs-orwell-which-dystopian
Thanks again for sharing this. I really enjoyed reading it, and I think you were spot-on!
I’m really looking forward to reading your article. I think you’re totally right that the situation today combines elements from both novels (makes sense—the writers were talking about different phenomena, but all these elements existed simultaneously). I’m really interested in seeing what you make of it. Expect a response sometime tomorrow or the day after.
Thanks so much for reading. This is the first time I’ve attempted a project like this, and the positive feedback is really encouraging. :)
Thank you, Melissa. The positive feedback you've received is in direct proportion to the authenticity and sincerity of your work...
Thought you might find this earlier work -- about the power of uncertainty and ignorance -- helpful: https://open.substack.com/pub/qolrm/p/the-innovation-algorithm?r=7hc45&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web.