Orwellian? - What do you mean by this?

[Palmares]

I haven't read all of George Orwell's books, but never thought he was that bad. Though, I have heavily criticised "Aniaml Farm" for it's generalisations and just plain lack of depth/detail.

So... my question is (to anyone and everyone), what do you mean when you call something Orwellian?

[Palmares]

Anyone...?

[Som]

When something is called Orwellian, its basically always referring to his book 1984.

The supreme totalitarian, always watching, all controlling government, is what is basically thought of with the description 'Orwellian'.

big brother is watching and so on.

[synthesis]

It means a totalitarian state, i.e., a government resembling that of his most famous novel, 1984.

You can find a summary of 1984 here (http://www.sparknotes.com/lit/1984/).

[Hegemonicretribution]

(Edited by hegemonicretrobution at 11:36 pm on Feb. 19, 2003)

[synthesis]

Hegemonicretribution, George Orwell was actually a brilliant socialist.

http://www.geocities.com/commiebrendan/soc...oms/orwell.html (http://www.geocities.com/commiebrendan/socoms/orwell.html)

[Palmares]

Cheers comrades!

[thursday night]

Actually, he was a revisionist person who wasn't all that intelligent. He doesn't appreciate that efforts have to be taken to protect the aims of the revolution. Oh well.

Anyways, DyerMaker is correct.

[Michael De Panama]

"Orwellian" refers to any similarities with the prophecies of the book "1984". It's definitely the best book I've ever read. I recommend you pick it up if you haven't already.

I don't see how you can be unhappy about the generalizations and amount of detail in Animal Farm. Please keep in mind that Animal Farm is intended to be written as a fairy tale. It's not the story of the USSR. It's a story about a farm with some animals on it. If you want to learn about the history of the Soviet Union, pick up a history book. Animal Farm is a fairy tale, and is written as detailed as a fairy tale should be.

[thursday night]

Actually, I believe Orwell said it to be a satire of the Russian Revolution.

[Hegemonicretribution]

It was seen as close enough for it to be banned. Some people here protect the USSR and its policies on freedom of speech by saying that it was only anti-communist propoganda that was from their enemies that was hidden from the people. I wouldn't say Orwell was really an enemy.

[Michael De Panama]

Quote: from thursday night on 5:49 pm on Feb. 19, 2003
Actually, I believe Orwell said it to be a satire of the Russian Revolution.

Yeah. No shit. It was the rise of the Soviet Union in fairy tale format. Nevertheless, it was still a fucking fairy tale, not a history lesson. If you want the specifics about what happened, open up a history book. You shouldn't expect them in a book about talking farm animals. I think Animal Farm is brilliant, personally.

[Pete]

I believe the publishing Animal Farm and 1984 was delayed until the end of WWII to not offend the Soviets.

[Michael De Panama]

Fun fact: "1984" was published in 1948. That's where Orwell came up with the date. He just flipped the numbers. If it was published in 1949, it would have been called "1994".

[Liberty Lover]

"George Orwell was actually a brilliant socialist."

He was until he returned from the Spanish civil war. From then he developed a strong hate of communism. Especially Stalin's brand.

[Exploited Class]

Orwellian best describes any type of invasion into privacy inside and outside the home, large databases on people, keeping track of where people travel or shop and what they buy, keeping track of social groups.

Terms like Doublethink, Newspeak and Thoughtcrimes are very popular owerllian terms used today. Also 5 minutes of hate.

Orwellian also is continous never stopping wars, evil enemy that does or doesn't exist. Changing historic documents or not keeping any historical documents. Obvious propaganda campaigns by government superstructures.

That covers most of them used today.

Oh and departments like Dept of War becoming Dept. Of Defense - Double Speak, Dept. of Love kind of thing.

[HankMorgan]

exploitedclass nailed it.

[Cassius Clay]

LOL, George Orwell a brilliant socialist?

I would hardly call a state informer to MI5 who was willing to take part in McCarthy style whitch hunts a socialist, let alone a brilliant one.

[thursday night]

Comrade Clay is correct.

[Saint-Just]

Orwell was a standard 'British Socialist'. His books are open to mixed interpretation. It is considered that 1984 is a criticism on the trend of the type of socialism developing in the Soviet Union. He came back from the Spanish Civil war disenfranchised with Marxism-Leninism because of communist attacks on the anarchists and moderate socialists in spain.

1984 is in a sense a great story, it paints a vidid picture. However, it is quite simpllistic and cannot be used as a comprehensive critique of totalitarianism. It is difficult to fathom what Orwell is trying to allude to in the book often, particularly at the end. He talks little about actual politics in the book and how they relate to the society in 1984.

It is a rather extreme view of any state, difficult to concieve that any state could end up like that. Oceania is concieved in the mid 40's, I think Orwell's view would be markedly different if he were alive today. Orwell's extreme liberalism can perhaps be observed from his relationship from Winston's relationship with Julia in the book; rather an unusual one.

George Orwell did more to negate socialist revolution then perpetuate it. He seems to me to be lost in his own self righteoussness, he criticises anything and everything. Somewhat of a one-man-army.

[Palmares]

Quote: from Cassius Clay on 10:11 am on Feb. 20, 2003
LOL, George Orwell a brilliant socialist?

I would hardly call a state informer to MI5 who was willing to take part in McCarthy style whitch hunts a socialist, let alone a brilliant one.


Appropriately said. I am entitled to criticism of a book that by most people I know (ignorant fools, that is, people not of this site) consider the best and only source to which communism should be judged. It's like using a quote or cliche saying as your proof of argument.

Do you see where I am coming from now?