Orwell and Rand

[Craig J. Hawkins]

I draw parallels between George Orwell's "1984" and Ayn Rand's "Anthem". Both books are about the control of men's minds through a collective ideology. The distinctive difference between the two is that Orwell is a Socialist at heart and Rand is a Capitalist.<br><br>Rand draws no real distinction between socialism and communism... She sees them both as destructive collectivist ideologies; she simply sees communism as an extreme form of socialism. George Orwell never draws this distinction.<br><br>Orwell is a pessimist and his book has a fatalistic ending.... There is no hope for humanity outside "Big Brother". Rand on the other hand is an optimist and her novel finishes on a happy note.<br><br>Anyway, I think anyone who enjoyed 1984 would also enjoy Anthem.

[jessezzel]

For sure I read Anthem before I read 1984 tho. Anthem has baisicly introduced me into the whole political novel scene.

[Reaper_ofall]

Ah, I like that you drew the connections, but at heart, you are wrong. George Orwell was not a socilist, he just was very sadistic. (read some of his other writings, on second thought, it would be best to read only his non fictional writings.)

They also concentrated on different aspects of what they belive to be important. Ayn concentrates on the facet of man creating for the sake of advancement, and perfection, and utiltiy. She belived strongly in that something must have a purpose other than to seem nice. She belived that advancement for advancement's sake was enough. Orwell, on the other hand, concentrated on the destruction and develution of mankind into utter ignorance. While Ayn sparked man to create, Orwell sparked man to see through the lies.

[DLPressley]

I agree with Craig J. Hawkins in that there is clear parity between 1984 and Anthem, at least on a formal level: each addresses the dangers of post-revolutionary ideology by tracing the innermost thoughts of a politically suppressed protagonist. However, I can not agree that Orwell "is a pessimist and his book has a fatalistic ending", nor even that 1984 offers "no hope for humanity outside 'Big Brother'", the fictional and fictitious leader of Ingsoc. Hawkins' summation would be accurate if 1984 did not feature an appendix. But it does. Moreover, the appendix is written in the past tense of the English language, not the present tense of Newspeak. If "Newspeak was the official language of Oceania" then we can deduce that it is no longer the official language: Ingsoc has been overthrown. Orwell's decision, even insistence, that 1984 should feature an appendix leaves what should be most enduring message of the text; a message which totally refutes Reaper_ofall’s characterization “George Orwell was not a socialist, he just was very sadistic”. The message of the novel is surely this: There is hope, even when it seems all hope is lost. And if there is hope, it lies in the proles.