1984 - The Ol' Switcheroo

"We shall meet in the place where there is no darkness." p 25

Do you smell foreshadowing? Because I detect a distinct foreshadowy odor.



I usually scoff at the idea of prophetic dreams. Most of my dreams are a confusing and terrifying blend impossible occurrences that I generally forget almost immediately. I sure wish that I would have a dream about a test that I'll have to take in the immediate future in which I am able to divine all of the answers. Dreams do not tell the future; however, they do often act as effective literary devices. So where is the place where there is no darkness? Winston states that it refers to the imagined future (p. 103), which Winston will never actually know, as we never reach the future, but one can share in. Winston ultimately uses this as reasoning for why he can trust O'Brien, because they both share the same imagined future, the same place with no darkness.

I, however, disagree. What's happening here, I think, is another of those classic trust reversals. O'Brien initially appears trustworthy while Julia is not trusted at all. Now, however, we realize that Julia actually shares in Winston's hatred for the party and thus deserves trust. Therefore, if the pattern of trust reversal holds true, then it will soon become apparent that O'Brien is not actually trustworthy at all, and the place where there is no darkness is not place of hope but an ominous prediction of Winston's fate. *Dramatic Chord*

1984 - Robot Zombie Apocalypse

"That was above all what he wanted to hear. Not merely the love of one person, but the animal instinct, the simple undifferentiated desire: that was the force that would tear the Party to pieces." p. 126

I, for one, do not understand this apparent fascination people have with having relations in these ridiculous locations, like a forest or beach. I imagine that the forest would be extremely unpleasant. Grass is very itchy, and there are bugs everywhere, and all of the birds and bees will be watching you intently. Hey, maybe that's where that euphemism comes from! Furthermore, don't even talk to me about the beach. Beverage or not, sex on the beach has got to be one of the worst experiences imaginable. Sand is annoying.

It's full of Kool-Aid, I promise

Oh yeah. So 1984...

The party essentially wants to turn people into robot-zombies. To the Party, the ideal citizen is one who is completely void of independent thought and desire. They just go about their daily lives without really thinking, simply...existing. This, really, is the point of Newspeak. It removes the possibility of anyone being able to even use words to fathom an independent thought. There is no individuality, just small parts of the big cohesive whole. So that's why Julia's desire alone is so particularly important to Winston. A single basic human desire, like the raw desire for sex, is essentially how Winston sticks it to the party and says that he refuses to be a robot zombie. Everyone knows that robot zombies do not want sex. Only processors.

1984 - DoublePlusParadoxymoron

"WAR IS PEACE

FREEDOM IS SLAVERY

IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH" p. 16

This little word-nugget is a clump of paradox all rolled into one, so it's certainly a good thing that paradox is one of my very necessary literary terms :D? Let's break this down, then.

War is peace? That's just preposterous, Big Brother. War and peace are opposites. War might be unpeace, but it certainly is not peace. The world of 1984 is locked in perpetual war. However, nobody ever...wins. There are no goals of conquest, or really any goals other than the destruction of whoever is the enemy at the time. No ground is ever won, and nothing of particular import ever actually happens. There are never any actual invasions, and short of the occasional rocketbomb in the ghetto, no one is in real danger of total destruction. The three superstates of Easasia, Eurasia, and Oceania are all just so powerful that none of the three will ever win or lose. The war will just go on forever. So why wage war at all? Few things are better for boosting production than the demand created by war. As long as bombs and planes and enormous floating fortresses are needed, the economy will keep on rolling. Thus, people will have jobs and the illusion that the nation is being productive is constant. Thus, peace is achieved through waging perpetual war.

So how can freedom be slavery then? The previous period of time marked by capitalism is viewed as a time of personal freedom. People were in charge, not the government. All people were theoretically free, as there was no Big Brother to keep them down. However, according to the Party's story, the people were not free. The very few capitalists in top hats ran the show and kept the people down. None of the common people had any rights, and they were essentially slaves to the wealthy. Thus, total individual freedom ultimately led to the enslavement of the poor and middle-class. Allegedly.

How can ignorance be strength? The root of this paradox lies in doublethink, the amusing trick wherein one accepts two mutually exclusive ideas as being correct, or consciously telling a lie while sincerely believing that the lie is true, forgetting a fact that is inconvenient and then remembering it as soon as it suits ones purposes. This is ignorance, of course. However, it's like...selective ignorance, ignorance with a purpose. The concept of doublethink allows supporters of the Party to decide what to be ignorant of at any given time, and this ultimately gives them strength. They can actively decide for themselves what is true and what they believe in, and even though they know they are lying to themselves, they know that it is true. Thus, they blindly adhere to the doctrines of the Party and are thus stronger as a result.

1984 - On Heroes and Legends

"On the battlefield, in the torture chamber, on a sinking ship, the issues that you are fighting for are always forgotten because the body swells up until it fills the universe, and even when you are not paralyzed by fright of screaming with pain, life is a moment-to-moment struggle against hunger or cold or sleeplessness, against a sour stomach or an aching tooth." p. 102-103

I like this quote because it's just so dreadfully realistic. It just discounts any belief in the power of heroism. Perhaps Winston is just a coward because the sight of the 110-pound brunette just scared the willies out of him to the point where he was unable to do anything. Perhaps he just lacks courage. Or maybe when it comes down to it, nobody really steps up and does the heroic thing when push comes to shove. That's certainly the general premise behind 1984. The Party will forever be in power because whenever a person could have the opportunity to stand up and be a hero, cowardice sets in, because going against the party is insanity and will be greeted with death. Really, all that's needed to end the cycle is for one person to stand up and be a leader within the proles. However, this will never ever ever happen. Orwell is essentially saying that nobody will put their neck out there because 1) Improvements are not guaranteed, 2) Death is a certainty, and 3) You will be deemed a lunatic by everyone else.

I, for one, think that what the people of 1984 really need is not a hero, but a legend.

Heroes get remembered, but legends never die.

Ten Bonus Points to whoever can list all of this man's titles in a comment below

1984 - Apple Math

"Who controls the past...controls the future: who controls the present controls the past." p. 34

"Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows." p. 81

They totally stole that first one from "Testify" by Rage Against the Machine. Somebody alert the plagiarism police!

Anyway, this blog post concerns the literary term "aphorism" which is an axiom or a brief little saying that has some sort of deep clever meaning. I'll be analyzing the two aforementioned aphorisms.

The first one deals primarily with the position of the terrible Party. The Party is capable of taking all evidence of past events and either destroying it or changing it to fit the needs of the Party. They can change all perception of human history so that no matter what, it appears that people's standard of living is always on the rise and that to fall back into the evils of capitalism would be terrible for everyone except the supremely wealthy. By doing this, the Party ensures that the common folk will never rise up in revolution in an attempt to attain a better life for themselves because they have no reason to believe that they will actually be any better off by overthrowing the party. The Party is in control right now, and thus can control the past, and therefore will control the future as well, since nothing will ever be able to overthrow it.

The second axiom is Winston's little idea, which is essentially like an answer to the first. Immediately before stating it, he ponders whether lunacy is really just being "a minority of one." If you are the only person who believes something, does that make you insane, and therefore wrong? Winston considers the idea, but with this quick maxim, he declares NO! Right and wrong are not a majority opinion. The party can declare that 2+2=5, and everyone may believe them, but when Tom has 2 apples, and his mom gives him 2 more apples, the recipe for apple pie which calls for 5 apples will, unfortunately be lacking 20% of its required appley goodness. Therefore, Winston is essentially expressing the idea that perhaps the Party is not so bulletproof. They cannot actually change the events of history, only the way that it is remembered. Perhaps therein lies the hope for escape from this dystopia?

Or perhaps it lies in this warm apple pie.