Printable View
i can fully understand why Shakespeare is qualified for a single Room
Why Orwell Can?
I read his animal farm, find it intersting and penetrating.
However he is not a most famous, at least, as far as a foreigner concern.
who can say something about why it is Orwell, not Dichens or Faulkner or.......?
;)
I <3 ORWELL
That is why. :)
Jonus
Yes I know what you mean, I have considered that myself. As much as I admire and enjoy Orwell, I don't think he deserves his own forum section over writers such as you mentioned. Admin has his own motives and agenda, perhaps...who knows?
I remember there was loads of Orwell topics in General Literature and General Chat before this forum section came up, especially before the Iraq War (discussions on propaganda and totalitarianism etc.) so maybe it was considered necessary to create a separate area of topic. That's my guess.
Popularity.
School is out right now so site traffic is half what it is usually but here is how Orwell compares in popularity to other authors on the site:
The above is from our traffic program, those are the top most visited pages on the site. Looking at that it should be quite evident why Orwell gets his own section.Quote:
www.online-literature.com/ 4.78% 3174
online-literature.com/booksearch.php 2.62% 1743
www.online-literature.com/orwell/1984/ 1.82% 1211
www.online-literature.com/authorsearch.php 1.46% 970
online-literature.com/author_index.php 1.38% 916
www.online-literature.com/shakespeare/ 1.14% 759
www.online-literature.com/orwell/animalfarm/ 0.92% 608
online-literature.com/quotes/quotation_search.php 0.81% 535
www.online-literature.com/quotes/quotations.php 0.67% 444
www.online-literature.com/tennyson/ 0.52% 348
www.online-literature.com/orwell/1984/1/ 0.47% 313
www.online-literature.com/hesse/siddhartha/ 0.44% 294
www.online-literature.com/yeats/ 0.44% 292
www.online-literature.com/dickinson/ 0.40% 263
www.online-literature.com/orwell/ 0.39% 261
www.online-literature.com/wordsworth/ 0.36% 242
www.online-literature.com/shakespeare/shrew/ 0.35% 230
www.online-literature.com/poe/ 0.34% 225
www.online-literature.com/maupassant/ 0.33% 216
Its not that Orwell is so much more popular overall - but moreso because this site is one of the most popular Orwell related sites on the Internet (whereas there are hundreds of sites on Shakespeare) so Orwell related traffic is higher.
My dear stavrokin,Quote:
Originally Posted by stavrokin
Despite the fact that you are correct in your statement that there should be more rooms devoted to more authors, it is my deepest belief that 1984 is the most relevant piece of literature of our time. It is a startling glimpse into a frightening, but all too foreseeable future. To me, many characteristics of governments today are reminiscent of the "Big Brother" style of life. Despite the fact that Animal Farm is highly enlightening and as you said, penetrating, it looks at communism in a playful light. 1984 faces issues head on and leaves you dizzy with "what if" speculations. So to answer your question simply,His continuing relevance is why he has his own room.
Also, if you investigate his journalism and essays, you will find more relevance then any other modern writer. However, I would be reluctant to call this part of his work literature.
Is Orwell the most relevant writer that we have? If you're a Poli-Sci major, then yes. If not then you will find that he only fills in part of the artistic void in you (or makes it bigger, depending on your response to him). If you study linguistics, then maybe Joyce would seem the most 'relevant' modern author. And, likewise, students of science might see Phillip K. Dick or Italo Calvino as being the most topical, &c. Everyone has their own theory.
Aldous Huxley
Born: 1894
Attended Eton College 1908-1913
Taught George Orwell at Eton College 1917
Brave New World published 1931
George ` Eric Blair' Orwell
Born: 1903
Attended Eton College 1917-1921
1984 published in 1949
I do not mean to minimise the import of George Orwell's dystopian vision, but while Huxley wrote and prophesised way before his time, Orwell's works are more grounded in the reality of cataclysmic war and current history as fodder of things to come.
Orwell warned us that an externally imposed oppression was possible, like banning books and suppressing information/truth, but Huxley's vision was one more of internal apathy, that people would grow to care less about books, that we would be spoon-fed information so much that it would become irrelevant, ridiculous and trivial, that we would become passive and egotistical. Huxley's Civil Libertarians and Rationalists, obsessed with snuffing out tyranny before it lay it's roots, forgot that people are obsessed with distractions, the `easy way out'.
In Orwell's 1984, what we hate and fear the most will ruin us as intelligent thinking individuals, whereas in Huxley's Brave New World, what we love and become addicted to will ruin us. Conspiracy paranoid theorists or passive self-indulgent, instant gratification seekers, either case is valid, but it is important to take into account the lives of these two men and how their socio-economic status would have formed the very politics they lived and wrote of.
I am biased towards having more interest in Huxley and his works, for a number of reasons, the main being I think he broke a lot of ground in his time with his vision (ironically though he was visually impaired) and had a deeper intuition of future events.
So was Joyce.Quote:
(ironically though he was visually impaired).
I am personally happy Orwell has his own spot on this site. He's an amazing author and definitely should be required reading in schools. Then again I think Alice in Wonderland should be required, so there ya go :D
Electric Kool-Aid, ahahaha . . that name is hot.
1984 changed my way of looking and thinking at things as a teen. It was required reading in High School and I am glad it was. I was a D student in reading and went to A+. I never "raised my hand" to comment. I couldn't keep it down, either could the teacher. I read the book the first day I had got it. Then again and again. I just found an old copy, is it legal to still have one in the USA?(joke) I am going to read it again 30 years later.
Outstanding story!Quote:
Originally Posted by badaxxe
This is one of the things about Orwell - of all the dead writers, he is the one most likely to bring about a chnge of life.
Shakespeare, Dickens, Joyce, Lawrence, et al can make us laugh, cry or fear, but I think only Orwell can change the way a person looks at the world.
Enjoy again, as I'm sure you will.
You, my friend; are very very wrong. Orwell can, and usually does, change your view on life or world but every writer does the same. Orwell can change your political and global views but others does it in every other aspects of our lives. Love, religion or anything else, it's totally irrelevant.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Atheist
bazarov, I absolutely agree with you. It is short-sighted to think that any of these great authors mentioned would not alter our lives and touch our inner souls intensely.Quote:
Originally Posted by bazarov
I think this statement is totally ridiculous "Shakespeare, Dickens, Joyce, Lawrence, et al can make us laugh, cry or fear, but I think only Orwell can change the way a person looks at the world."
....because all of these great authors had a profound effect on people and their views. I love Orwell, but he was not the only one, hardly. No doubt he was influenced by some of these author's great works. Now there is an irony!
I believe the Atheist was semi-right in a respect. It seems that Orwell has a culmination of all the right ingredients, religion, war, fear, hatred, love, and presents them in a far more efficient way then modern day, and old time writings. Orwell has opened my world to less known writers in his time period, and I imagine I will be more impassioned to listen to their words, but without Orwell, and reading the stories of Donne, Twain, Joyce, etc, there was no one that had a profound effect on me, as George Orwell did.
Orwell was anti-Bolshevik, anti-imperialist, and anti-fascist at a time when many Europeans (and many intellectuals) only fit into 1 or 2 of those descriptions, and his writings are based on those positions. His "Rules For Writers" are instructive and he was a relentless enemy of cliches.