Students, homework questions? Please read this first!

[The Atheist]

Hi there!

Because the same - or very similar - questions seem to get asked about 1984, we're in the process of starting some sticky threads to try to cover most topics arising from homework or study requirements.

Bear with us over the next week or so as Bazarov and I (and any other helpers - who will be most appreciated!) set the threads up.

If you do want to help, have ideas, or have input you'd like to make, please PM either Bazarov or myself so we don't double up on the workload.

Making LitNet the premier site on the internet for all things George Orwell!

(Well, it already is, but we're gonna make it even better)

[shari13]

what is the setting of the first chapter?

[book_wurm777]

london. i am pretty sure.

[bazarov]

If the question is where, then the answer is London.

[mem1629]

soo.. i have this essay question for a final tomorrow and i really really really need help on it. so if anyone could give me input on the matter that would be GREAT. so here's the question:

1984 is the story of a totalitarian state which holds power by smashing every humanist value. The Party had declared war on the human mind and its tools: memory and language. In an essay ezplain how the party achieves this "war" by using concrete examples from the novel.

[kevinthediltz]

well the dehumanization in use of language has to do with the principles of newspeak (see the section of 1984 after the actual story ends. well at least it is in the book i own.) Newspeak contains no creative aspect. It has simple, concrete words to express everything. There are no synonyms or similar words. Also, it takes away negitive words from direct speech. For instance, "bad" is expressed as "ungood." This speech eliminates any form of rebellious thought because we think in words. If our language is not creative, then our thought can't be creative either. (and by the way i do not take and do not try to take ANY credit for what i just wrote. I basically quoted "Principles of Newspeak" from the back of 1984). As far as memories, "Who controls the past, controls the future. Who controls the present, controls the past." The party is recognized as right in every aspect. If a man is killed, then every record of his existance is destroyed, and the party says that he never existed, then he never existed. People are brainwashed into believing whatever the party tells them, even if it goes against what they remember.
I hope I have helped you at least a little.
~kevin

PS: do you know how to post new threads? I couldnt f-n figure it out!:crash:

[Karlt]

I am writting an essay about how Orwell explores the theme of control. I have chosen to focus on the physical setting, the way the controllers and the controlled are contrasted, the motif of the lack of privacy, and the use of fear and intimidation to control.
As you would expect, there are plenty of examples of all of these in the text, however, i am having trouble linking the way in which Orwell explores these areas and the subsequent effects on the reader.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.

[The Atheist]

As you would expect, there are plenty of examples of all of these in the text, however, i am having trouble linking the way in which Orwell explores these areas and the subsequent effects on the reader.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Not sure exactly what you're after here as the effect on readers seems to run concurrently with the story - we feel the fear as the reality of being watched 100% of time is revealed. Although we live in a different world to Orwell in 1948, privacy is still prized with a man's house still his castle, the exact opposite of 1984.

[Karlt]

Ah yes, I haven't explained myself very well. I am doing a comparative essay on One Day In The Live Of Ivan Denisovich by Solzhenitsyn and of course Nineteen Eighty-Four in which i compare how the two authors explore the theme of control. I stated before the key points I am looking at. If anyone has ideas (especially The Atheist:) ) about how i can develop these ideas, even if they don't have a knowledge of "One Day" that would be great.

[The Atheist]

Ah yes, I haven't explained myself very well. I am doing a comparative essay on One Day In The Live Of Ivan Denisovich by Solzhenitsyn and of course Nineteen Eighty-Four in which i compare how the two authors explore the theme of control. I stated before the key points I am looking at. If anyone has ideas (especially The Atheist:) ) about how i can develop these ideas, even if they don't have a knowledge of "One Day" that would be great.

Ok - it's many years since I read Ivan Denisovich, but I do recall the control mechanisms being similar to 1984. That was Orwell's point, really - all totalitarian regimes must enforce the same controls to keep power.

The logical start is media control. While the USSR didn't try to change history, the output of media was every bit as sanitised for party purposes as in 1984.

Along with that, the spies reporting on friends and family in 1984 bears a lot of similarity to what USSR tried to institute. While few bought the idea of being a hero by turning in people with traitorous thoughts or actions, some did use it as a way of ingratiating themselves with KGB and the party.

USSR used an extensive network of KGB and associates to actively spy on people using the technology available - there's no doubt that had they had the ability to watch everyone through telescreens, they would have.

In both societies - real and imaginary - the theme of control starts at birth. Indoctrination in party rules permeated every school and house.

The message is clear - to preserve individual freedom, we must fight against central control. Ivan Denisovich is a great comparison, because in 1984 we see the theoretical effects of total surveillance, while ID gives us the historical view of what actually does happen.

Orwell uses scare tactics to hammer the message home, while Solzhenitsyn lets the actions speak for themselves.

The key driver in both books is to play on fear. Scary movies use fear as a means of entertainment, the two books you've chosen use fear as a means of controlling us - to make the reader see it the way the authors see it, they have used fear to ensure we come up with the inescapable conclusion.

You're doing this at a really good time, because this thread (http://www.online-literature.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3781) gives you a couple of current examples you can use about how the fear factor of 1984 can actually be too much for some people - check out the couple of respondents who think Winston was not destroyed. In their case, the message might be missed because they have recoiled against the fear brought on by the message.

Hoping all that helps in some way - it looks a bit disjointed reading my own post, but I hope I've covered the salient points!

If not, keep asking...

[TiGGeR LoVeR]

I am in serious need of help!!!

I have an essay due in less than 16 hrs & my assignment is to

"write an essay in which i explain how the a character in the novel 1984

could be viewed as morally ambigious and why his moral ambiguity is

significant to the work as a whole."


in the essay i must include 5 quotes from the novel (including chapter it came from)

i dont know where to start..so as you can see i am totally lost and i really need someone's help.

[Psynema]

I am in serious need of help!!!

I have an essay due in less than 16 hrs & my assignment is to

"write an essay in which i explain how the a character in the novel 1984

could be viewed as morally ambigious and why his moral ambiguity is

significant to the work as a whole."


in the essay i must include 5 quotes from the novel (including chapter it came from)

i dont know where to start..so as you can see i am totally lost and i really need someone's help.

You read it right?

1984 = most annoying in a sense since nearly every high school assigns it and it gets old quick LOL...

Morally ambiguous because the gov't has restricted everything...which if you think about it, strips people of moral values...if nearly everything and every thought it banned and you are arrested for petty things such as a bad thought, then living in that society, how can one tell that having a bad thought is a lesser crime than murder? You'd get arrested for both in 1984 and disposed of for both...so if raised in that world, how do you know the difference that a bad thought is normal and a lesser crime than murder?

[Broadwaygirl]

I was just wondering about the ulcer. Winston seems to mention it a lot. Is it a big part of the book? Why does he have it? This was just something that caught my eye, thank you!:)

[The Atheist]

I was just wondering about the ulcer. Winston seems to mention it a lot. Is it a big part of the book? Why does he have it? This was just something that caught my eye, thank you!:)

It was just part of the general malaise of Winston. He was not a well man - Orwell again inserting himself into the story - with poor lungs, no flexibility and stomach ulcer. In those days, stomach ulcers were thought to result from stress and poor nutrition, which would have encouraged Orwell to give Winston one.

Luckily, we now know they're caused by bacterial infections and anyone can get one.

Pretty sure there's no more significance than that.

[Psycho-1960]

Hi, everybody, my first post here! I have a very big problem on writing a 5000-word thesis on 1984. The funny thing is, none of my supervisors has read this book, yet they still manage to point fingers on my selected topic.

I'm required to choose a specific topic(should be narrowed down) that has never been talked deep before, yet once mentioned in some authorities or experts or professors'(anyone has reputation, influence on English literature) articles, papers etc.. So I have to do massive literature reviews. I'm merely an undergraduate. I feel all I want to write or reflect have already been discussed by others. I'm trapped.

So could anyone give me some suggestions on the thesis topic? And the topic "should has significances". Thank you very much!

[bazarov]

That has never been talked deep before...there is no such a thing. Pick one of stickies and make a massive review.
BB and The party or Thought Police looks here like most interesting and reviewed.

[The Atheist]

Hi, everybody, my first post here! I have a very big problem on writing a 5000-word thesis on 1984. The funny thing is, none of my supervisors has read this book, yet they still manage to point fingers on my selected topic.

You what?

I'm guessing your subject is English, so I find it almost incredible that none of the supervisors have read 1984.


I'm required to choose a specific topic(should be narrowed down) that has never been talked deep before, yet once mentioned in some authorities or experts or professors'(anyone has reputation, influence on English literature) articles, papers etc.. So I have to do massive literature reviews. I'm merely an undergraduate. I feel all I want to write or reflect have already been discussed by others. I'm trapped.

As Bazarov says, it isn't possible to find a part of 1984 which hasn't already been 1000 times, so that's an incredibly naive thing for a teacher to suggest.

I recommend you go back to the teachers and point this out. You'd be left with discussing why Winston had such a bad cough.


So could anyone give me some suggestions on the thesis topic? And the topic "should has significances". Thank you very much!

After you've clarified it with the teacher, come back in and see if we can make some progress, because the task you've been given is impossible.

Please do direct your teacher to this thread as evidence that what you've been asked to do can't be done.

[Psycho-1960]

Thank you, bazarov and The Atheist. Yes you guys are right. And my interest is always the Proles and emotion control. One supervisor suggested "Asceticism in George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four". You bet, I'm an English major in China, and none of my supervisors've read 1984, not even Chinese version. They kind of heard of it.

The reason they want the subject "untalked"(newspeak ;P) deep is that if one subject has been discussed so much by professors or experts, there's no need for you to summerize their opinions.

About a subject like "why winston had such a bad cought" is similar to what I lifted before: "why uses Virginia Woolf to replace the Big Bad Wolf in Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?" And this kind of questions can be answered within a paragraph, no extension to a 5000-word thesis. XD All my peers have this kind of problem.

But the teachers won't change the directions of choosing topics. And this rule of propose a research topic exists for several years. Here's an example they gave: Topic "The Madmen in King Lear" and topic "The Madmen in King Lear and Merchants of Venice" are different because the first one is analysis of madmen in King Lear, the latter one is talking about the similarities or differences between the madmen in these two plays. And the latter one is preferred to be the subject for the madmen in both plays have been researched alone, yet their connection not been discussed.

It's a bit of lengthy to explain more, hope you understand what I mean to say. ;) Do you think Asceticism in Nineteen Eighty-Four is worth discussed?

[The Atheist]

Wow. They work you guys hard in China!

I doubt most NZ students would 5000 words in all three years! And certainly not in one go below Master's level, but you have to live with it.

Yes, ascetism and 1984 is a good one. How you keep it going for 5000 words is the trick...

I'd go with the obvious description of ascetism to kill off a few hundred words, then explain where it fits into the story. Why it's enforced by the Party, why it isn't enforced for Inner Party members.

You could get into links with yoga and join in Winston's physical jerks as part of the learning. The usual idea of ascetism is to live cleaner, healthier lives fits in nicely and you can even bring in Julia's Celibacy League (I think) as another branch.

Might work.

Good luck!

Let us know how you got on and feel free to post a draft before you hand it in. I think you'll go quite well - you're already smarter than your classmates as I don't see any other ones talking about it.

;)

[Psycho-1960]

Thanks for the advices, exactly the outlines I've been thinking about. And thanks for the encouragement. ;) I have to write a 1000-word proposal for the topic, and only start the work after the approval of the committee of thesis writing in the upcoming new semester. ;p

Bibliography just killed me. XD

Thanks again!

[bazarov]

Thank you, bazarov and The Atheist. Yes you guys are right. And my interest is always the Proles and emotion control. One supervisor suggested "Asceticism in George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four". You bet, I'm an English major in China, and none of my supervisors've read 1984, not even Chinese version. They kind of heard of it.



My God, you remind me on Kafka's Josef K. :D How can they supervise you if they haven't read it?!
Good luck; I agree with Atheist on thesis.

P.S. If they haven't read it; did anyone ever tried to put something that actually has nothing to do with the story? That would be fun. Like - fall of Big Brother! :lol:

[The Atheist]

P.S. If they haven't read it; did anyone ever tried to put something that actually has nothing to do with the story? That would be fun. Like - fall of Big Brother! :lol:

Great idea - they want something which has never been discussed before, so that would fit!

[Psycho-1960]

Agree! Good point!

[bazarov]

But would it be allowed in China to write about fall of Big Brother and Party?

[Psycho-1960]

I'm afraid bazarov, it's not OK to talk about it publicly cuz there's only ONE party in China. ;p But don't forget to state clear that you're commenting on the society in the book, nothing else. ;)

[Belizabeth]

what is the setting of the first chapter?
Oceania.


You read it right?

1984 = most annoying in a sense since nearly every high school assigns it and it gets old quick LOL...

Morally ambiguous because the gov't has restricted everything...which if you think about it, strips people of moral values...if nearly everything and every thought it banned and you are arrested for petty things such as a bad thought, then living in that society, how can one tell that having a bad thought is a lesser crime than murder? You'd get arrested for both in 1984 and disposed of for both...so if raised in that world, how do you know the difference that a bad thought is normal and a lesser crime than murder?
It's been a banned book of course they're gong to have it out there for high schoolers to read. It's actually something that can get them interested.

i mean duh tell some teenagers that there's controversy and that they use to not be able to read the book and they'll jump at the chance to explore why..

[Dark Lady]

May I first of all say that I greatly admire the task bazarov and The Athiest have decided to take on here. I've just skimmed through all the sticky threads here and would like to say well done guys.

It's been at least a few years since I've read 1984, although I do remembering loving it. I've found it interesting to note the comments about every high-school student having to study it as I never have! In fact I've never even read much about it since I read it (although I was obviously aware of how well-known and alluded to it was) and so was enthralled by these threads. I am considering writing about it in my Modern Lit exam as there are rich pickings for topics (as shown here) and I could see it fitting in very nicely with - even if it is in stark contrast to - other texts I've considered.

I have a question that I thought I'd put forward in this thread as it doesn't seem to fit in the other sticky threads. As I said it's been years since I read the novel so there are a lot of things I don't remember. Out of interest; are there any explicit references to the other countries? I remember there being wars, and the fact that every few years who they are at war with and who they are allied with changes (although not according to the Party, obviously) but how much do we learn about the state of these places? I'm just trying to remember if Orwell gives any indication of whether other places have a similar totalitarian government or whether there are still other more liberal states in existance.

[The Atheist]

I have a question that I thought I'd put forward in this thread as it doesn't seem to fit in the other sticky threads. As I said it's been years since I read the novel so there are a lot of things I don't remember. Out of interest; are there any explicit references to the other countries? I remember there being wars, and the fact that every few years who they are at war with and who they are allied with changes (although not according to the Party, obviously) but how much do we learn about the state of these places? I'm just trying to remember if Orwell gives any indication of whether other places have a similar totalitarian government or whether there are still other more liberal states in existance.

Orwell describes the world as being split into three totalitarian regimes, with the other two being Eastasia and Eurasia, split roughly along the lines of Europe + USSR being Eurasia and eastern Asia forming Eastasia. It is presumed that the other two have similar regimes to Oceania.

The only area not subject to any rule by one the three superpowers is Africa south of the Sahara, which is described as an area of tribal conflict, no rule and is one of the prizes fought for by the three superpowers. There are no countries as we understand them.

[Dark Lady]

Orwell describes the world as being split into three totalitarian regimes, with the other two being Eastasia and Eurasia, split roughly along the lines of Europe + USSR being Eurasia and eastern Asia forming Eastasia. It is presumed that the other two have similar regimes to Oceania.

The only area not subject to any rule by one the three superpowers is Africa south of the Sahara, which is described as an area of tribal conflict, no rule and is one of the prizes fought for by the three superpowers. There are no countries as we understand them.

Thank you for your swift reply! That's interesting. No mention of North or South America or Australia. I was just trying to get a view of Orwell's world to place Oceania in. That and procrastinating (the internet makes that much easier than it should be for me). I may well come back to your Orwellian sub-forum after I'm set free from university.

[The Atheist]

Thank you for your swift reply! That's interesting. No mention of North or South America or Australia. I was just trying to get a view of Orwell's world to place Oceania in. That and procrastinating (the internet makes that much easier than it should be for me). I may well come back to your Orwellian sub-forum after I'm set free from university.

Sorry, I figured you know that Oceania is UK + all of the Americas and the ex-Commonwealth countries in the Pacific - NZ, Australia & the Pacific Islands.

[bazarov]

Sorry, I figured you know that Oceania is UK + all of the Americas and the ex-Commonwealth countries in the Pacific - NZ, Australia & the Pacific Islands.

Orwell says that or geography?

If it's Orwell, than OK; but if it's geography; then it's totally wrong. North and South America are not parts of Oceania.

Looks like 102 is my destiny. Damn! :lol:

[The Atheist]

Orwell says that or geography?

If it's Orwell, than OK; but if it's geography; then it's totally wrong. North and South America are not parts of Oceania.

Looks like 102 is my destiny. Damn! :lol:

:lol:

Definitely Orwell's Oceania, but in time, both Americas will come under our control!

[Hubert]

What ideas are expressed in the passage and what do they tell you about the speaker?
What feelings does the speaker express? What does that tell you about them? Are their feelings consistent?
Does the character belong to a particular character type or represent a certain idea, value, quality or attitude?
What is the social status or the character, and how can you tell from how they speak and what they speak about?
What is the sensibility of the speaker? Is the person ironic, witty, alert to the good or attuned to the evil in others?
What is the orientation of the person?
How much control over and awareness of Winston's emotions thought and his language does the speaker have?
How does the narrator characterize the character through comment or through description?

[The Atheist]

What ideas are expressed in the passage and what do they tell you about the speaker?
What feelings does the speaker express? What does that tell you about them? Are their feelings consistent?
Does the character belong to a particular character type or represent a certain idea, value, quality or attitude?
What is the social status or the character, and how can you tell from how they speak and what they speak about?
What is the sensibility of the speaker? Is the person ironic, witty, alert to the good or attuned to the evil in others?
What is the orientation of the person?
How much control over and awareness of Winston's emotions thought and his language does the speaker have?
How does the narrator characterize the character through comment or through description?

While there are a few of us able and willing to help with homework, we aren't going to do it for you, neither are we clairvoyant.

Can you please describe which characters and passages you're talking about and at least give us your thoughts to show that you've even read the book.

Thanks!

[Tyler Durden]

Hi, I am currently working on an essay that is worth 10% of my grade and I was wondering if I could get some comments about the intro paragraph and ideas for the rest of the essay. I need 5 sources from the book and 2 secondary sources (if you guys have any suggestions that would be greatly appreciated).

The novel “1984” by George Orwell is a warning about the dangers of totalitarianism and touches on the different ways how totalitarianism can remove individuality. When one loses their individuality, they can be manipulated into doing anything. In the novel, the government succeeds in doing so through limiting expression, propaganda and restricting all pleasures.

I was thinking for limiting expression I could go in about Newspeak and how it limits creative expression since there are no synonyms and negative words. Also about no need to write so people forget how to write on paper.

For propaganda I was definitely thinking about altering history, the image of Big Brother and Goldstein, the schools where kids go to get brainwashed, and i forgot the latin phrase which means if you repeat the same lie over and over again, it will be true. The quote with thoughtcrime is not a crime, thoughtcrime is death. Oceania was at war with Eurasia but then they start war with Eastasia and the telescreen claims they were always at war with Eastasia.

For restricting pleasures I am thinking of everybody eats the same bad food, live in the same kind of homes? I am not sure about that one, no sexual pleasure, I'm not sure but are all books banned or are they all revised? When the people have no pleasure, they convert to Big Brother for a sense of self and a sense of victory because the telescreen promotes patriotism.

If you have anything to add or some comments and tips that would be greatly appreciated thanks!

[Gladys]

When one loses their individuality, they can be manipulated into doing anything. In the novel, the government succeeds in doing so through limiting expression, propaganda and restricting all pleasures.

Don't forget that fear, psychological annihilation and finally a bullet through the brain, are perhaps the major ways 'totalitarianism can remove individuality' and silence Outer Party members. That 'thoughtcrime is death' understandably spreads terror in all. How many of the Outer Party members named in 1984 end up in Room 101?


When the people have no pleasure, they convert to Big Brother for a sense of self and a sense of victory because the telescreen promotes patriotism.

Maybe, but are Winston, Julia and Syme the exception or the rule. Is Parsons almost alone in being brainwashed?

[Tyler Durden]

I meant people as in the masses, there will always be outliers in society and those are dealt with punishment from the Thoughtpolice. I did think of fear but I didn't quite know where to fit it in, propaganda is already massive and I'm not sure I could make a whole paragraph dedicated to fear other than thoughtcrime is death. I'm not sure what you mean with the question "How many of the Outer Party members named in 1984 end up in Room 101?" If you could elaborate more on that it would be greatly appreciated, thank you for your time!

[Gladys]

I meant people as in the masses, there will always be outliers in society and those are dealt with punishment from the Thoughtpolice.

Outliers! Why would you classify Parsons, Ampleforth, Syme, Winston and Julia as outliers? Perhaps insightful Syme but hardly the others. These better represent a cross-section of the Outer Party. The Inner Party may well destroy a hundred thousand a year in The Ministry of Love.


I'm not sure what you mean with the question "How many of the Outer Party members named in 1984 end up in Room 101?" If you could elaborate more on that it would be greatly appreciated...

Easy answered: all of the characters named above! Are you, Tyler Durden, able to cite any other Outer Party member named in 1984?

[Tyler Durden]

From what I get from having read this book multiple times (for pleasure), I feel the only outliers are Winston and Julia. The rest have all been "converted" to The Party. Winston and Julia are the only ones who acted on their impulses to deliberately defy The Party knowing full well the consequences of their actions. The rest although some of them or others not mentioned in the book might be aware of the injustice done upon them by The Party, fear destroys their will to act.Through this fear, their subconscious activates a defense mechanism in which they conform to the authority figure in this case Big Brother or The Party.

Also this is what I have so far, if anybody would like to proof-read and leave some comments; positive or negative, please do so as everybody's opinion is duly noted and much appreciated. Thanks!


The novel “1984” by George Orwell is a warning about the dangers of totalitarianism and touches on the different ways how totalitarianism can remove individuality. When one loses their individuality, they can be manipulated into doing anything. In the novel, the government succeeds in doing so through limiting language, propaganda and restricting all pleasures.

Words are an important aspect to expressing oneself. “The Party” replaced English (Oldspeak) with “Newspeak”; a new form of language. “Newspeak” eliminates synonyms, antonyms, unwanted words and many other ways to reduce the vocabulary. The main purpose of Newspeak is make citizens unable to even think negatively towards the beliefs of The Party. “The purpose of Newspeak was not only to provide a medium of expression for the world-view and mental habits proper to the devotees of Ingsoc, but to make all other modes of thought impossible.” (p.174) This eliminates a huge threat to “The Party” because if one person tries to get others to see the injustice of The Party, they will fail to derive the words necessary from their vocabulary. As a result of reducing the vocabulary, the citizens of Oceania also have trouble communicating their thoughts and opinions to others. As Newspeak enters into one's subconscious, it also reduces the mind's range of thought. “Newspeak was designed not to extend but to diminish the range of thought, and this purpose was indirectly assisted by cutting the choice of words down to a minimum.” (p.174) If someone loses their range of thought from being able to express their opinions, they lose a big part of their individuality and as a result, fear and uncertainty come to life. People become scared because they have lost control of the power to express themselves and as a defense mechanism, they look for comfort or answers from an authority figure; Big Brother. “Most of us humans do not deal well with uncertainty. We look to our senior authorities, whether the President, the Governor, the CEO, the Executive Director, or Mom and Dad to create stability and security and clarity for ourselves. That's what we want from authority: direction, protection and order.” (Linksky, 2009)

[Tyler Durden]

Here is the full version

The novel “1984” by George Orwell is a warning about the dangers of totalitarianism and touches on the different ways on how totalitarianism can remove individuality and secure total obedience. When one loses their individuality, they can be manipulated into doing anything. In the novel, the government succeeds in doing so through limiting language, propaganda and removing pleasures.

Words are a crucial aspect to expressing oneself. “The Party” replaced English (Oldspeak) with “Newspeak” which is the new form of language. “Newspeak” eliminates synonyms, antonyms, unwanted words and many other ways to reduce the vocabulary. The main purpose of Newspeak is make citizens unable to think negatively towards the beliefs of The Party. “The purpose of Newspeak was not only to provide a medium of expression for the world-view and mental habits proper to the devotees of Ingsoc, but to make all other modes of thought impossible.” (p.174) This eliminates an enormous threat to “The Party” because if one person tries to get others to see the injustice of The Party, they will fail to derive the words necessary from their vocabulary. As a result of reducing the vocabulary, the citizens of Oceania also have difficulty communicating their thoughts and opinions to others. As Newspeak enters into one's subconscious, it also lessens the mind's range of thought. “Newspeak was designed not to extend but to diminish the range of thought, and this purpose was indirectly assisted by cutting the choice of words down to a minimum.” (p.174) If someone loses their range of thought from being able to express their opinions, they lose a substantial part of their individuality and as a result, fear and uncertainty come to life. People become scared because they have lost control of the power to express themselves and as a defense mechanism, they look for comfort from an authority figure which in this case is Big Brother. “Most of us humans do not deal well with uncertainty. We look to our senior authorities, whether the President, the Governor, the CEO, the Executive Director, or Mom and Dad to create stability and security and clarity for ourselves. That's what we want from authority: direction, protection and order.” (Linksky, 2009)

Propaganda is “the spreading of ideas, information, or rumor for the purpose of helping or injuring an institution, a cause, or a person”. (Merriam-Webster 2009) Propaganda in the novel 1984 removes individuality by manipulating people into the same mindset. Their goal is to serve The Party and Big Brother. “The Party” uses many ways of spreading propaganda such as altering history, the “doublethink” technique, Big Brother, Emmanuel Goldstein, and “early conditioning” of children. Altering history and “doublethink” go hand in hand, but in order to alter history and have objections, doublethink must be implemented first. Doublethink is “the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them”. (p.124) It is a mental technique that allows all Party members to believe what is needed and forget what is not, but being able to remember what they have forgotten when needed. An example of this in the novel is Winston's (the protagonist) job. He must edit public records in favor to The Party and also believe in what he had altered without question. Once people have learned doublethink, The Party starts to alter history to suit what is best in their interests without question. The Party's slogan about controlling the past explains why. “Who controls the past controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.”(p.154) An example that shows the result of doublethink and altering history is when Winston recalls “The Party said that Oceania had never been in alliance with Eurasia. He, Winston Smith, knew that Oceania had been in alliance with Eurasia as short a time as four years ago. But where did that knowledge exist? Only in his own consciousness, which in any case must soon be annihilated. And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed -if all records told the same tale — then the lie passed into history and became truth.” (p.20) Another example is one of Winston's observations. “It appeared that there had even been
demonstrations to thank Big Brother for raising the chocolate ration to twenty grammes a week. And only yesterday, he reflected, it had been announced that the ration was to be reduced to twenty grammes a week. Was it possible that they could swallow that, after only twenty-four hours? Yes, they swallowed it.” (p.32) Most of the people who do not conform to these methods are subjected to Argumentum ad populum. “A proposition is held to be true because it is widely held to be true or is held to be true by some (usually superior) sector of the population.” (p. 103, Copi and Cohen, 90) Symbolism is also used in propaganda. “Big Brother” is the face of The Party. Winston describes him as “an invincible, fearless protector, standing like a rock against the hordes of Asia”. (p.9) On the other hand, Emmanuel Goldstein is the enemy and the “Two Minute Hate” is dedicated to him. It is very black and white; Big Brother is their best friend and Emmanuel Goldstein is their worst enemy. There is no thinking required to determine who is bad and who is good, no gray areas, which is exactly what The Party wants. The final technique The Party uses to spread propaganda is to plant the seed at an early age. The children would even go as far as betraying their own parents to the Thought Police. “It was almost normal for people over thirty to be frightened of their own children. And with good reason, for hardly a week passed in which The Times did not carry a paragraph describing how some eavesdropping little sneak — ’child hero’ was the phrase generally used — had overheard some compromising remark and denounced its parents to the Thought Police.” (p.14) The Party targets young children because children are easily influenced and when they grow older it feel natural to obey The Party. (Optional Proverbs 22:6 from the bible)

Even after restricting language, spreading fear and propaganda, The Party also removes pleasures such as sex, food, clothing and books for total control. “All competing pleasures will be destroyed.” (p.154) Winston narrates, “In any time that he could accurately remember, there had never been quite enough to eat, one had never had socks or underclothes that were not full of holes, furniture had always been battered and rickety, rooms underheated, tube trains crowded, houses falling to pieces, bread dark-coloured, tea a rarity, coffee filthy-tasting, cigarettes insufficient — nothing cheap and plentiful except synthetic gin.” (p.34) The plan is to make sure everything is mediocre. As a result, almost no pleasure can be obtained from anything. For example, during work all party members must wear their blue uniforms and if everyone is wearing the same ragged clothes, nobody will get compliments. People in modern society are subject to consumerism and one main reason is so they can show off to their peers and fish for compliments. The Party's reasoning of why everything is the same is compliments make people feel good therefore nobody should feel the satisfaction and pleasure of receiving one. Books that provide thought and reflection provide pleasure for readers because they can explore other times or places. If everybody read about a place where hard workers receive better housing and food, they might start to question The Party and demand change. In the words of Sir Francis Bacon “Knowledge is power.” However, not all books are banned; the ones approved and edited by The Party can be read. Since one of the goals of The Party is to remove the use of imagination and thinking, approved books would not provide much pleasure. Finally The Party tries to remove sexual pleasure because it creates a conflict of interest because the two lovers might develop emotional ties with each other thus distributing the love for Big Brother and The Party. “The sex instinct will be eradicated. Procreation will be an annual formality like the renewal of a ration card. We shall abolish the orgasm. Our neurologists are at work upon it now. There will be no loyalty, except loyalty towards the Party. There will be no love, except the love of Big Brother.” (p.154) As a result of eliminating all pleasure, the people turn to Big Brother for help. That's why The Party keeps one defining pleasure that only Big Brother can provide: the feeling of power and victory. “But always — do not forget this, Winston — always there will be the intoxication of power, constantly increasing and constantly growing subtler. Always, at every moment, there will be the thrill of victory, the sensation of trampling on an enemy who is helpless.” (p.156) This dismisses all individual pleasures and manipulates people to welcome and encourage Big Brother (totalitarianism).

Language is a key aspect to expressing oneself, therefore a smaller vocabulary leads to difficulty in communication. Propaganda is a great way of manipulating opinions and the absence of pleasure leads to frustration. The Party combines all their knowledge of the human mind and mentally bombards every single member of the party by influencing them at a young age, implementing a new language without synonyms and antonyms, the “doublethink” technique, a black and white society, achieving equally through administering mediocre possessions and eradicating all competing pleasures of power. In the end, the main purpose of applying mental warfare is to eliminate all possible threats of resistance against The Party. George Orwell creates a searing image depicting how totalitarianism can rule with an iron fist. However he leaves us with the insightful analysis that in order for this to occur, the government must first attack the minds of the masses by removing all defining characteristics of each person's individuality.

[Gladys]

From what I get from having read this book multiple times (for pleasure), I feel the only outliers are Winston and Julia. The rest have all been "converted" to The Party. Winston and Julia are the only ones who acted on their impulses to deliberately defy The Party knowing full well the consequences of their actions.

Why would the Inner Party go to such lengths in the Ministry of Love and elsewhere unless many are defying the party, if only in small ways like the promiscuous Julia? Surely her very many sexual partners are also defying the Inner Party. Winston's holding cell in the Ministry of Love was full, but how many such cells are there in that huge building and how many equivalents of Room 101? The extent of unrest in the Outer Party is obvious from the time and effort spent in quelling it - even planting Charrington and installing and monitoring telescreens in prole territory.

Are the rest of the Outer Party 'converted'? Fear obviously inhibits any member from showing even a hint of defiance, and Orwell only gives us insight into the mindset of the small circle around Winston. Surely these few members are representative of the other six million. And only a minority resemble compliant and stupid Parsons in adoring the totalitarian regime.

Winston acts to defy the party because he is representative of a large, but shrinking, remnant who remember life before INGSOC. Significantly Winston is a dreamer and a fool because resistance is useless. Julia, and all her pragmatic peers, well understand that the Party is now invulnerable. They do what they can to make life more bearable with no thought of outright rebellion.

If Winston and Julia were "the only ones who acted on their impulses to deliberately defy The Party" and all others compliant zombies, then 1984 would be much less than the thoroughly grim book it is. The politics of 1984 are poison.

[awalker0424]

I need help with writing the outline for my literary criticism paper on 1984. I really just need an example so I can see how it should look. I had found one I wanted to use when I was doing my thesis statement but I don't know where it is anymore.

The theme I am working on is the government taking away the life of the citizens' through the use of psychological and physical torture, constantly changing past and present information, and narrowing the language with newspeak and the concept of doublethink. I'm not even sure which order these should go in.

I actually like and hate this book because it makes me think so much to the point where I overthink the whole thing so I really want to do good on this. I had a similar problem with my thesis statement.

Any help will be greatly appreciated.

[volcomsk]

i have to write an essay and its due tomorrow.Orwell seemed to predicted some developement correctly, but seemed to miss the mark on other developments in history and science. What did he foresee correctly? What did he foresee incorrectly?

[The Atheist]

Check the other thread - I hope I've given you a couple of pointers.

[hcalais]

This thread looks like t hasn't been posted on in a while but I have a question.

I know that many of the places in 1984 correspond to actual places in London and I was wondering if Victory Square corresponds to an actual square in London?

[peanutcucumber]

I am currently only on Book II, but I am very confused as to what the significance of O'Brian is? He keeps coming up in Winston's thoughts and he is caught trying to please him. Is there something I missed because Winston has only seen him a few times over twelve years so why is he so interested in O'Brian? Will he later become an important part of the plot? Thank you!