Talk:Nineteen Eighty-Four

From RationalWiki

[edit] Conservapedia & 1984

I won't edit the article as it is so well written. But Conservapedia is the first place which reminded me of that marvellous book. Those times before and after the Night of the Blunt Knives, all that doubletalk, blocking, Party Doctrine, but most strikingly, a new Truth, a rewriting of History, enforced with deletion of User pages and even edits in Talk pages. And when a Small Brother, an eminent Party Member, goes out of favor (TK et al.), he too is terminated, deleted, deletedpaged.

I must say, the Orwellian nature of Conservapedia was what fascinated me in those times. If Animal Farm is more clearly anti-communist (maybe from the inside), the world of 1984 is only partially communist - no more than Conservapedia is communist.

Oh, wait, maybe Conservapedia IS communist? Editor at CP 02:32, 10 December 2007 (EST)

On a purely structural level, Conservapedia reminds me a LOT of the 1950s and 60s Soviet Union, back when they were airbrushing people out of encyclopedia photos when they fell out of favor with The Party. In my experience, all authoritarian organizations, no matter what they claim to believe in or want to do, end up acting pretty much the same ways. --Gulik 04:49, 10 December 2007 (EST)

[edit] Interpretation of 1984

I have no sources or scholarly reasons to back this up but I always read 1984 less as a criticism of totalitarian govt and more as an exaggeration of some of the features of modern day democratic society.Damo^Hi 09:44, 27 October 2008 (EDT)

Well, newspeak has been compared to political correctness. I would class most reality TV as prole-feed. I wouldn't be suprised if Orwell intended for some of it to resonate by basing it on real things, although it's not all government controlled and with a plan in mind, it's happening. ArmondikoV^{...I'll toast your lawnmower!} 11:08, 27 October 2008 (EDT)

Just off the top of my head, things like the lottery and the garbage pop music that focuses so much of the people attention off their problems sounds like something a modern day Chomsky would write.Damo^Hi 11:17, 27 October 2008 (EDT)

Maybe, but I think the general consensus is that Orwell was specifically criticizing left-wing totalitarianism; Orwell was very much of the Left, but developed a very sour opinion of Soviet communism after his experiences as a Republican irregular in the Spanish Civil War. (In fact, that's a big part of Asimov's criticism -- Orwell was so meticulous about mocking the excesses of Stalinism and the fringe Left that he ignored the dangers of right-wing ideologies like the Fascism he fought in Spain.) Now the flipside would be Fahrenheit 451, where Bradbury was criticizing censorship by political correctness and public outcry. You sure you don't have the two confused? EVDebs 13:35, 27 October 2008 (EDT)

Unlikely, since I haven't read Farenheit451. Just the whole idea of governments controlling information for their own benefit is not a huge leap from the way media corporations control information to support their idealogy. It's been a while since I read the book perhaps I'll have another look someday soon.--Damo^Hi 01:40, 28 October 2008 (EDT)

1984's nightmare is totalitarianism taken to its logical extreme: a regime pursuing power for power's sake alone. Ideology has become irrelevant. "If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face -- for ever." --Robledo 21:23, 27 October 2008 (EDT)

If I recall correctly, there are no corporations (and thus, no media corps) in Orwell's books, because they've been replaced by the state. That was part of the critique as well. If you want a good critique of media power, you want cyberpunk. Researcher 21:34, 27 October 2008 (EDT)

I read in a forward he wrote that 1984 was intended to portray (what he felt was) the logical conclusion of capitalist society. Animal Farm was a critique of the Soviet Union, but 1984 was a critique of the West. _Essayist RA ^{Talk to me} _ 21:50, 27 October 2008 (EDT)

I'm pretty sure Orwell never wrote a foreword to 1984. A quick Google and scan says you're probably thinking of Thomas Pynchon's foreword to the Centennial Edition (Plume, 2003). --Robledo 22:15, 27 October 2008 (EDT)

Oh... Silly me. Well, in my defense, "Pynchon" and "Orwell" look rather alike.  : ) _Essayist RA ^{Talk to me} _ 22:21, 27 October 2008 (EDT)

Well whether Orwell wrote it or someone else, I am glad that someone else has the same idea as me about the book. I always felt the book was aimed more at the west than at dictatorships.--Damo^Hi 01:40, 28 October 2008 (EDT)

I don't see how capitalism could develop into Ingsoc. If I remember correctly, there's a rationing system rather than money, which kind of rules out the idea of capitalism in the first place... Wazza (Not Wazzock, Wazza)^{Approach the Presence} 23:36, 27 October 2008 (EDT)

See: USA. Headed there if we don't pay attention. Although, yes, it is easier, I suspect, for socialist societies to overdo it and turn into monster states. ħuman ^{why is there a weird line through the "h" in my username?} 00:52, 28 October 2008 (EDT)

It really depends who's in charge. 1984 makes it clear that the top people are political rather than corporate. And yeah, nanny state can become big brother, but that's what democracy is there to take care of. Wazza (Not Wazzock, Wazza)^{Approach the Presence} 01:31, 28 October 2008 (EDT)