Last night, I finished reading 1984 (DON'T ENTER IF YOU HAVE NOT READ!)

[redsoxliberal]

And may I say that I want to commit suicide.
That was possibly the greatest book that I have ever read... but the "third book" is UNBELIEVABLY depressing.
Why did he capitulate?
Why did the Though Police let him go for seven years?
Why must O'Brien have tortured him so (first by telling him of the brotherhood/letting him in, then by physically torturing him.)

WHY?

[redsoxliberal]

1. self kick

[ET Awful]

2. Why?

Because freedom is slavery.

edit: I realized that was somewhat vague. The party (O'Brien) wanted him to experience that "Freedom is slavery" and wanted him to experience loving Big Brother. The goal was NOT to convert him to the cause and execute him, but to allow him to live for a while in the knowledge that what he believed to be truth was wrong and what the Party presented as truth was, in fact, the truth.

It was nothing more than a way for the Party to exert their power, which they admit is their reason for existing.

[redsoxliberal]

3. Ignorence is Strength too.

I know this... but why must they have tortured him so with making him think the brotherhood was real?
Why did he capitulate so easily?

[ET Awful]

11. So easily? Room 101 is where you are taken to face your deepest

and darkest fear, which they find via their eternal spying and eavesdropping. Winston could not have retained his sanity and gone through the ordeals to which he would have been subjected in Room 101.

He was put in a rack, he was tortured endlessly, and it was not an easy capitulation, he was there long enough to waste away to a mere ghost of his former self (as exhibited by the scene when O'Brien has him look in the triple mirror and removes one of his teeth merely by pulling on it with his fingers).

He was not there for a short period of time, it was quite a while. (Also I elaborated above on my original answer since it was so vague).

[4_Legs_Good]

14. What's in Room 101 is the worst thing in the world

[ET Awful]

16. Yes, but it is different for each person.

Everyone has a very different idea of what the worst thing in the world truly is.

[4_Legs_Good]

20. For some, it's not even fatal...

[ET Awful]

29. One thing worth considering is that for Winston, the worst thing in the

world may NOT have been the rats, but betraying Julia.

[4_Legs_Good]

30. Good point...

Maybe it's the actual act that is committed in Room 101, not that which causes one to commit the act.

cool!

david

[ET Awful]

34. Perhaps the worst thing in the world

is that which we carry inside of us, i.e. the ability to betray our entire belief structure.

[redsoxliberal]

15. I guess you're right.

I'm just disappointed that he did.

[4_Legs_Good]

23. The real disappointment should be the realization that YOU would too

Maybe even that you WILL.

There's no escaping the Party. It's not possible. Let the pendulum swing one last time and then stop it.

david

[redsoxliberal]

35. yes... you are right. Perhaps that's what is getting me.

Room 101, for me, would be getting eaten by maggots or something like that... and I KNOW that I would make someone else be in my place. :(

[4_Legs_Good]

40. Room 101 for me is insanity, I think

that's the thing that scares me more than anything else.

But Bill Cosby used to say that he wasn't afraid of going senile, because if he did, he wouldn't know it.

Heh heh heh

david

[redsoxliberal]

43. maybe a loved one getting alzheimers.

[4_Legs_Good]

45. My grandma and great aunt

both had a bit of that, but they were well, well into their 90s. I can't imagine what it would be like at 65 or something. Gawd, what could be worse?

david

[Kat45]

4. I just read it for the first time last year.

Man, that was quite a book. And pretty scary to read in light of our current administration in Washington. It was depressing that he capitulated, but the book wouldn't have been the same--and had the same impact--if he didn't.

[redsoxliberal]

7. true... but such a depressing story

That said... quite possibly the best book, with the best ending, ever written. I'm not sure yet.

[devilgrrl]

5. '1984' is pure genius...

a brilliant book!!!!!!

[Book Lover]

6. Orwell....

First of all, if you're still hungry for more Orwell in this vein, try the essay Politics and the English Language free and online here http://www.resort.com/~prime8/Orwell/patee.html. It will make you feel better. I hope.

Many critics have said that with Orwell, you really don't have to dig *too* deep. Why did Winston capitulate? Because he was human and was broken by the machine of the Party. O'Brien tortured him because he could, just like he said to Winston (paraphrasing here: "The purpose of power is power.")

Not sure I recall the thing about 7 years, though. I don't believe Winston was held for that long (?)

[redsoxliberal]

9. they followed him for 7 years

before they captured him... it was kind of weird. Slow torture.

I agree with your analysis... I'm just overcome with emotion and no real outlet right now... I'll just whine and cry in my room until I forget it all. :D

I'll go read the essay in a few.
thanks.

[4_Legs_Good]

18. If you haven't read Animal Farm, do it now

It's even more succinct and far more clever, if less dark and less complex.

I will work harder
Napoleon is always right

All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.

david

[redsoxliberal]

21. saw the movie years ago... plan on reading the book shortly.

[4_Legs_Good]

22. The "live action" movie SUCKED

and really destroyed the book, particularly the ending, which was like a nightmare to watch. Lordy when the animals were happy with their new slave masters - I just wanted to smash something. If that's the version you saw try your hardest to blot it out of your memory forever.

The animated version which I think was made in the eary 60's is much better, though the ending still suffers from extrapolation.

The book will have you rolling with laughter and crying at the same time. It's a good anti-depressant for 1984, just because it's so cleverly done.

Enjoy!

david

[redsoxliberal]

50. as I said, I watched it a long time ago

so I don't really remember too much of it... but I liked the movie. I don't remember much of the plot though.

[immoderate]

41. Perhaps the 7 years was to show

that you're never really safe. Time is on their side.

--IMM

[immoderate]

8. It's been a while.

I don't know if I can answer those questions, but the party handbook is the scariest thing I ever read.

In general, it shows how ultinately powerless he was. It's about futility.

--IMM

[redsoxliberal]

13. yes... and the proles did NOT have power, btw

the only mildly intelligent one was charrington... who was not a prole. That regime never would end. O'Brien was right... they all loved big brother.

[4_Legs_Good]

26. I'm not sure that they actually loved Big Brother, they just didn't bother

with that kinda stuff. Their minds were more concerned with the day to day. The humanity was crushed out of them by poverty, I'd say, I guess.

The proles will never become concious.

david

[redsoxliberal]

36. yes, that is the problem... the party will never be overthrown if they

don't become concious, but there is not conceivable way where they will.

[Swede]

10. Break out the victory gin.

I read the book many years ago,it was a frightening prediction of things to come.

[4_Legs_Good]

24. The effect of which was like getting hit on the back of the head with a

trundgeon.

heh heh heh. Love me my Victory Gin!

david

[4_Legs_Good]

12. He had no choice

at least I don't think so. The point is that the Government had developed a system whereby they *can* control your mind, but less that, I guess, than that they can make YOU want to control your mind.

I agree, best book ever... well Animal Farm and Moby Dick give it a run for it's money.

Keep in mind that everything in 1984 came to pass in one form or another before 1948. It's not a "prophecy" about the future, it's an exposee (sp?) about the past and a warning.

The best part is when Winston reads the book. Everything anyone who wants to remain a human being is in there. And the most key point is that it all becomes ever more sublte.

War is Peace
Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is Strength

and don't you forget it!

david

[Synnical]

17. I read if for the first time after the 9/11 attacks

Amazing piece of literature. At that time I thought the Shrub Administration was using bin Laden as a "Goldstein". They have since backed away from that stance, IMO. But, not from using New Speak and such.

O'Brien was part of the system. They had to realistically "convert" Smith.

I thought the 1984 movie version of "1984" was very well done. Richard Burton as O'Brien and John Hurt is amazing as Smith.

I didn't find it to be depressing, more of a reality check, and very thought provoking.

My two cents. There are loads of analyses of the book you can read online.

[Worst Username Ever]

19. I think O'brien's tactic was very telling.

Be your punisher until you believe he is your friend. Pretty much the repug credo, IMO.

[deadparrot]

25. My heart dropped as I read the entire last section of that book.

Ohhh, O'Brien, why have you forsaken me????:(

[4_Legs_Good]

31. They got me a long time ago...

Ahhh, what a great line!

david

[barackmyworld]

27. We are the dead...

"You are the dead"

The first time I read this book, I screamed at that line. Literally screamed.

[4_Legs_Good]

32. If you want an image of the future of humanity

envision a boot stomping on a human face forever!

Ahhhhhh...

david

[redsoxliberal]

38. I knew it was coming because the water jug was empty

[punpirate]

28. All your questions are...

... interrelated. What does O'Brien tell him as he is torturing him? That the only thing that matters is the state, all else is subordinate to it, including Winston's individuality.

O'Brien was simply testing him. Had Smith shown no curiosity, or had reported O'Brien, he would be considered a good Outer Party member, and therefore, trustworthy. Because he didn't, he had to have his mind cleansed, according to the Party.

The time lapse might be to suggest that the Party didn't get around to things very quickly (was highly inefficient), but it's also possible that there was some arbitrary determination that he was needed as an example to the rest of the Outer Party at that time. When everything is for show, and nothing is real, it's a bit like needing a new game show contestant--just pluck one out of the available pool.

The torture and the capitulation are part and parcel of the desire for absolute conformity--of action and thought. That's the point about Newspeak--it's meant to short-circuit rational, independent thought. The party exists for its own sake, and anyone not thinking of it always lacks allegiance to it and is a threat to it.

Being able to torture someone into a capitulation means, in a way, resurrecting them to the party. For a system which operates for its own sake, the worst situation is having one or more people walking around who see the party for what it is--an arbitrary system which has no purpose other than to preserve power for the few. This is the point about 2+2=?. The rational answer is four, but in an upside-down, Alice-in-Wonderland society such as INGSOC, the proper answer is whatever the party says it is. Reducing Smith to the point of not being able to any longer form a rational thought makes him a suitable member of that society again.

The history of Orwell's writing of the novel certainly hinges on his disillusionment with communism after Stalin's purges and the institution of that particular brand of totalitarianism, but he also felt that the rest of the world had sunk to a level where arbitrary systems controlled what people knew and felt and thought, particularly through the distortion of language, even in Great Britain. As I recall, the title came not out Orwell's desire to imagine a future, but to suggest a present, to suggest that those distortions of language to control thought were current at the time of the writing of the book. He'd simply reversed the last two digits of the year in which he was writing the book, 1948.

For more on Orwell's take on the politicization and distortion of language, be sure to read his essay, "Politics and the English Language," which is here:

http://www.george-orwell.org/Politics_and_the_English_Language/0.html

Cheers.

[4_Legs_Good]

33. My Dinner with Andre

My Dinner with Andre is a good movie to watch after you've read 1984. There's a great segment where they talk about the Orwellean Nightmare and preserving a nucleus of the human race to survive a very dark age.

Good idea, eh!

david

[Radical Activist]

37. The question is

Is Big Brother just allowing us to resist as long as we don't get too far with it? Maybe that's what our system of representative democracy is designed to do.

[redsoxliberal]

39. perhaps... it is interesting that they knew all along he was a subversive

but chose to sit on it. They probably knew about Julia as well, and probably would have never done anything had she not joined winston.

[RedFireDiamonds]

42. 1984, love it, but try this book...

Brave New World by Aldous Huxley. Same type of futuristic look at the world, infinitely more sad, because you don't end up hating the government like you hate Big Brother.

[redsoxliberal]

44. good book... not as good

less dark as well... more sad you say? I disagree.

[RedFireDiamonds]

51. I think...

It's more sad because in Brave New World the society was aimed toward stability and happiness, which isn't too far from what we're aiming at now, and everyone was stable and happy. In Huxley's world no one knew better, they were all happy with their lives and content and the society was stable. Even the dissenters were happy: they were sent away to their own little island where they could discuss truth and science on their own and be content. In 1984, people did know better and they were afraid to dissent because they were crushed for doing so but at least there, people had a choice. In Brave New World, I can see that the people being oppressed, but they can't see it. I think that's what makes it sad, especially because you can compare things like Soma and anti-depressants or other meds, and decanting and cloning and perfect humans. In 1984 you can fight against the gov't, you probably won't be successful, but you can fight. In Brave New World there isn't a possibility of that and you I can kinda see elements of Brave New World appearing today. Not that we'll go that far, but...

[redsoxliberal]

52. I disagree

The fact that the people had a choice in BNW (if they were intellectuals, they joined 'the most interesting people in the world' on the islands) which would satisfy their needs to an extent. The rest were happy... so while it was far from ideal, it was much better than 1984 where there really is no choice. You can rebel in both, but in 1984, you get tortured and killed. That said, the lack of individual relationship and compassion in both are scary. The twins in the hospital always mess with me.
Anyhow, I can see more of F451 in todays society than either... and a combination of all is actually more representitive of the truth.

[rockedthevoteinMA]

54. How about "It Can't Happen Here" by Sinclair Lewis?

Novel by Sinclair Lewis, published in 1935. It is a cautionary tale about the rise of fascism in the United States. During the presidential election of 1936, Doremus Jessup, a newspaper editor, observes with dismay that many of the people he knows support the candidacy of a fascist, Berzelius Windrip. When Windrip wins the election, he forcibly gains control of Congress and the Supreme Court, and, with the aid of his personal paramilitary storm troopers, turns the United States into a totalitarian state. Jessup opposes him, is captured, and escapes to Canada. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0451529294/qid=1111027099/sr=8-1/ref=pd_csp_1/103-4283284-8519836?v=glance&s=books&n=507846

Bought it after the selection, and cannot bring myself to read past page 38, because it is too relative. Makes me shudder...

[Left Is Write]

46. I thought they were both quite good.

I read them both in college, then wrote a paper comparing the authors' differing views.

[jmowreader]

49. It's a totally different kind of book

That's okay, though.

I don't think Brave New World is quite as good of a book as 1984, but I like it better. I like Huxley's dystopia better than Orwell's.

[Taxloss]

47. Because oppression is pointless if you don't love it.

Loving slavery is the ultimate surrender. The ultimate victory for the state. That's why the state must have total triumph over the mind, and the past; without thought and memory, the individual is a slave. Hence the Thought Police and the constant editing of the past.

[erinlough]

48. I teach "Animal Farm"

every year and each year I learn and see more. As an educator I am especially interested by the manipulation of education; who gets it and how it is used to further the power balance. I find it to be as important to what is going on right now as "1984".

One question I ask the kids that always draws discussion is, "Looking at the different animal groups in Animal Farm, which group do you think is most responsible for the unfairness that exists?" For me I dislike Benjamin the Donkey the most. He can read and he sees everything that is going on yet he does nothing. What do you think?

[CanuckAmok]

53. Do you have students who draw a pro-RW conclusion from Orwell's work?

I'm asking because I've known conservatives who have used Animal Farm and 1984 to support RW arguments against supposed "government attacks on privacy"...particularly during the Clinton White House.

I love Orwell, BTW. My favourite is "Coming Up for Air", for some reason... I know it's not one of his greats, but I really took to that one.

I was disappointed to read that he was actually fairly well-off during his "down and out" period; that he would often have new suitpants sent to him in Paris when his got too grotty. Not that he was rich, by any means, but he didn't "need" to live the way he did.