a discussion on george orwell

[Angry Young Man]

i have just started 1984 and am up to the part with the 2 minutes hate (i did literally start it 1/2 an hour ago and read for 10 mins) and goldstein seems to resemble trotsky. i get the same impression that i got from animal farm. orwell had a sympathy for him.
the problem with animal farm is that its used as a piece of right-wing propaganda. they say its valuable as a demonstration of communism in action, when in truth its a critique of stalinism.
the truth is, as was true anyway, and anybody who has read 'road to wigan pier', george orwell was a socialist, and one very firm in beliefs at that.
if he wanted his most influential book to be a piece of fascist propaganda, he wouldnt have fought with the republicans in the spanish civil war.
i am interested to hear what other people have to say about orwell, even if it's just your favourite of his books.

[redstar2000]

George Orwell -- Reactionary? (http://www.redstar2000papers.com/theory.php?subaction=showfull&id=1097859426&archive=&cnshow=headlines&start_from=&ucat=&)

Orwell Again??? (http://www.redstar2000papers.com/theory.php?subaction=showfull&id=1105929449&archive=&cnshow=headlines&start_from=&ucat=&)

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[Regicidal Insomniac]

The societies that resulted from both Animal Farm and 1984 were the product of certain conditions, certain characters and their actions. In no way do they imply that all revolutions will inevitably fail (see Homage to Catalonia for more details). This may be how you understood it, but every young person I know who has read these novels has been powerfully inspired - not discouraged - to take political action and to agitate for revolution. It is about understanding power, and this is what nearly everyone except you takes out of it. Yes, they are 'sad' stories about resistance to authority that have often been used and abused by capitalists, but the solution is not to blacklist Orwell as a 'reactionary' and surrender him to our enemies; it to make sure that people understand his true intentions and are capable of looking at these as more than sad stories.

[Angry Young Man]

Originally posted by Regicidal [email protected] 9 2006, 03:24 AM
The societies that resulted from both Animal Farm and 1984 were the product of certain conditions, certain characters and their actions. In no way do they imply that all revolutions will inevitably fail (see Homage to Catalonia for more details). This may be how you understood it, but every young person I know who has read these novels has been powerfully inspired - not discouraged - to take political action and to agitate for revolution. It is about understanding power, and this is what nearly everyone except you takes out of it. Yes, they are 'sad' stories about resistance to authority that have often been used and abused by capitalists, but the solution is not to blacklist Orwell as a 'reactionary' and surrender him to our enemies; it to make sure that people understand his true intentions and are capable of looking at these as more than sad stories.
why do you think orwell doesnt inspire my revolutionary spirit? ive already said my favourite book is "road to wigan pier". anyway, the school i went to, no book inspired anybody. i used to live in norfolk, which sort of clings to the feudal system. and of course there is the problem that most people would rather watch their fellow illiterates such as jade goodey and jodie marsh

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by Regicidal Insomniac
...every young person I know who has read these novels has been powerfully inspired - not discouraged - to take political action and to agitate for revolution.

Well...if you say so. :P

All I can possibly say in reply to such an assertion is that these "young people" are completely misreading and misunderstanding those two novels.


It is about understanding power...

Misunderstanding power is more accurate. Orwell roots power in a "flaw of humanity"...without any real grasp of either why power is sought or how it's maintained.

Some people are "just power mad" like some people are "just evil".

That's not even remotely true.


...but the solution is not to blacklist Orwell as a 'reactionary' and surrender him to our enemies...

He is one of our enemies.

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[Regicidal Insomniac]

To claim that since example a and example b ended tragically means that Orwell denoted all resitance to be futile and ultimately destructive is both a logical fallacy and an indication that you haven't read anything more by the fellow. All of his stories are about resistance. From Keep the Aspidistra Flying to 1984, every one of his books is about a single character trying to transcend his or her conditions. These personal rebellions all end differently and, as in reality, none of these endings tend to be utterly perfect. Gordon Comstock's resistence to money (and the reverence thereof) in Keep the Aspidistra Flying was unsuccessful because he was consumed by lifestylism and ignored the people around him. Bowler's attempt to breakaway from his drab suburban life and the looming world war in Coming Up For Air were dogged by his romanticism of the past and refusal to accept - and change - the present. Fact is, Orwell wrote largely in cautionary tales; and this is not proof that he thought resistance to be hopeless: it is proof that he thought it was worth doing right.

I suppose that we fundementally disagree about the themes of these two stories and there isn't much that can be said to reconcile that. You can either be greatly inspired by Winston's defeat to fight against tyranny and make sure that such a story never becomes fact; or you could be discouraged and decide that rebellion is worthless. (For the record I've never come across a case of the latter.) Having read quite nearly every word Orwell published - as well as several biographies - these are the conclusions that I have come to regarding his writing. I'm sure that the conditions under which one was to 'study' 1984 (or Animal Farm for taht matter) in schools has changed much over the decades. No longer is it used vehemently as a propoganda tool, and if you have just one critical thinker in the classroom it can become a revolutionary text. It brings up all issues of power and its effects on the governed that otherwise are never allowed to be discussed in the school. It is a fantastic book (in my opinion) and a great weapon against tyrannies of every sort that we should keep securely in our arsenal.

Orwell deserves neither to be deified nor demonized; however, he does deserve to be read.