Scariest Book I've Ever Read

I read 1984 over forty years ago and to this day I'm still haunted by that image of having rats strapped to your face.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brian Bean

Unlike West Germany, that did not take the socialist road and went on to become the second most economically powerfull country in the world, the UK blew the reconstruction fund on trying to set up a welfare state that by 1979 had brought the country to its knees. A more detailed description of the post-war events that led to the collapse of the Callaghan government in 1979 and Mrs Thatcher's arrival in office can be found in my novel Pro Bono Publico.

---

Are you an expert in economic and political history, or a novelist?

If the former, then I find your post a deliberate attempt to talk politics. By making constant political jibes in numerous threads, you must be aware that people will want to challenge you, and start a political debate.

If the latter, then you must also be aware that a novelist creates a scenario, from imagination. And that's the key word. Your self-promotion of your "novel" was very deftly done, but is it a novel? It's obviously your take on the political situation of the time, it doesn't make it correct. You very obviously have a diametrically opposing view to Orwell, as you have shown elsewhere that you dislike him intensely, asserting in another post that he never wrote anything which wasn't in support of his politics. Why is that so bad for him, but not for you? I don't know you, but from reading many of your contributions on a literature forum, you have made your political allegiances very clear. I for one could challenge your take on the political situation leading up to Thatcher's government, but I thought this thread was about scary books.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brian Bean

2. Quote mining? I haven't read Muggerige's autobiography for years;the quote has stayed with me because it conforms to similar statements about Orwell that I do not recall in detail except one made by a colleague, when Orwell worked for the BBC during the war, that Orwell would tell lies to prove a point. I can think of no context in which Orwells' statement about shop-keepers can be justified.

---

Are you from a family of shopkeepers?

:D

I find the charges a bit steep. How many authors are there who don't take at least a little prosaic licence when writing? The key with Orwell is context.

To me, it seems that Orwell wrote everything expecting every reader to have written everything else he's ever written. When you see a snippet in Coming up for Air which makes the hairs on your arms stand up as you recognise the spectre of Big Brother hanging over you, or during the reading of A Clergyman's Daughter, you realise that Dorothy has morphed into Eric Blair, heaping coals on the heads of private schools.

You can't take one quote out of context and expect it to explain anything.

He was eccentric and he was also self-contradictory, but overall, I believe, he was right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brian Bean

3. I think it is fairly implicit in 1984, and Orwell's other wriitings, that he thought something similar could have happened. If not, he wouldn't have written the novel.

---

Could have. It's not predictive, and I think the shape of Mao's China, Stalin's Russia and present-day N Korea aren't too far off confirming that all totalitarian regimes will behave in ways remarkably similar to that Orwell displayed. He did, of course, have evidence to show that it had already happened, so I think an argument that the premise of 1984 being wrong is pretty difficult.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brian Bean

4. England's post-war problems had everything to do with democratic socialism and the failure of the opposition to change the socialist's programme.

---

This is too close to a political discussion for the forum, but I have a little knowledge of the subject and would be glad to discuss by PM, e mail or any other medium. It's also irrelevant to the discussion of Orwell - he wasn't PM.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brian Bean

5. I meant that, just as Orwell thought that the depression of the 1930s would lead to democratic socialism, the present unfolding depression has convinced you of the same outcome.

---

I'll just note that that's not what I said - I made the comment that it seems to be happening by default, which is quite different, but as I say, we can continue this privately.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scheherazade

There is no doublethink... and there is no "watching". I am simply reading all your posts to make sure that you are all alright and happy.

*notes down that The Atheist has shown signs of aggression via smilies*

---

I love rats!

Very, very happy, Comrade!

(I'd say I did all my physical jerks this morning, but it sounds a bit ruder in 2009 than 1949, so I won't say it! :D)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PabloQ

I read 1984 over forty years ago and to this day I'm still haunted by that image of having rats strapped to your face.

---

Ugh. You've admitted that while Scheherazade's in the thread.

There's no hope for you now. (Smile and wave)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wessexgirl

Are you an expert in economic and political history, or a novelist?

If the former, then I find your post a deliberate attempt to talk politics. By making constant political jibes in numerous threads, you must be aware that people will want to challenge you, and start a political debate.

If the latter, then you must also be aware that a novelist creates a scenario, from imagination. And that's the key word. Your self-promotion of your "novel" was very deftly done, but is it a novel? It's obviously your take on the political situation of the time, it doesn't make it correct. You very obviously have a diametrically opposing view to Orwell, as you have shown elsewhere that you dislike him intensely, asserting in another post that he never wrote anything which wasn't in support of his politics. Why is that so bad for him, but not for you? I don't know you, but from reading many of your contributions on a literature forum, you have made your political allegiances very clear. I for one could challenge your take on the political situation leading up to Thatcher's government, but I thought this thread was about scary books.

---

I wouldn't claim to be an expert on anything, but in writing the novel it was essential that I got my facts right, which necessitated a lengthy study of the period concerned.

As for making constant political jibes in numerous threads, I have made in excess of 500 posts and I doubt that more than 10 have a political connotation. None of the posts were terminated by the forum's moderators for breaching the rules regarding the discussion of politics.

With regard to the novel there has been no intended promotion although naturally I would like people to read it. Yes it is a novel, with a fictional tale that runs in counterpoint to the political and judicial events that form the basis of the story. In order give verisimilitude to the story, I have based a number of the fictional characters on people that I have known over a long period of time. The actual political figures of the period are never referred to by name although they are readily recognisable to those who lived through or have studied the period.

I do not personally dislike Orwell, he was a very talented writer, it is what he represents that I take exception to and my book is a refutation of it.