Shattering revisit to our future

I read this and was broken by it in my twenties. I was newly out of college and entrenched in a job that was going nowhere and a life that was also flat and without interest when I picked this up. My own existence was so dreary at the time that I was actually heartened by the fact that I could go out and buy a candy bar which poor Winston could not.

This is a brilliant dive into what our world could become and already has to a certain extent under Trump. Trump's continual dribbling of lies has become so common place that no one is shocked anymore. We have become battered into apathy, like the lovers in the book. If the people continue to hate, fear, and mindlessly follow this traitor to democracy, we have only ourselves to blame.

n  "War is peace.
Freedom is slavery.
Ignorance is strength."n

n  Initial Thoughtsn

When the world around is getting a touch dystopian and government control is starting to become a bit strong, then it's time to read that classic piece of fiction...1984. One of the most famous and regularly quoted novels of all time. I'm absolutely ashamed to say I've never read it before.

What finally swung it for me was I had to read a controversial book for a reading challenge that I'm undertaking. What's more controversial than a book that's been banned in certain countries, burned in a few and could actually get you a prison sentence for possession in Stalin's Russia?

It's been one of those books I've had my eye on for the years and wanted to be in the right frame of mind before reading it. I just had a feeling this would be heavy and being written in 1949 I was expecting the style to be quite challenging.

n  "The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command. "n

n  The Storyn

As I've already said the book was written in the late 1940s and set in the future world of 1984...hence the title. The story follows the central character of Winston Smith, a low ranking member of the government, who suffers inner turmoil as result of the extreme government control and the ominous figurehead of "Big Brother."



Society is bleak in its totalitarianism and Winston's job is to rewrite historical documents, like newspaper articles, to support present political propaganda. There is no objective truth and facts can be adapted, changed or manufactured at whim. 'The Party' controls literally every aspect of the public's lives and there is no joy and certainly no love. But what they do not control is thought, although they do do as much as they can to achieve this, and Winston harbours an intent to rebel against the system.

n  "Perhaps a lunatic was simply a minority of one. At one time it had been a sign of madness to believe that the earth goes round the sun; today, to believe that the past is unalterable. He might be alone in holding that belief, and if alone, then a lunatic."n

Winston Smith, begins a small scale rebellion against the regime, starting a diary of his innermost thoughts. With writing being banned and the content being regarded as a deadly thought crime, it will be the chopping block if discovered...or worse.

With his newly acquired lover, Julia, he begins a covert fight for freedom and justice, in a world where all others appear oblivious to the oppression they are living under. Thats the nuts and bolts of it. An absolutely fantastic premise that is used to maximum effect by Orwell to engage the reader and draw you in to this captivating narrative.

n  The Writingn

Orwell's prose are deceptively simple and have a pretty contemporary feel to them that suited me perfectly. There's some very deep and thought provoking themes and the style adopted by Orwell is perfect for getting them across. Honestly, if you're concerned about this book being too challenging in a literary sense then it won't be. The only difficulty you will have is when it challenges your long held beliefs on the world we live in.

n  "Everything faded into mist. The past was erased, the erasure was forgotten, the lie became truth."n

A key theme in this one is language and how it can be used to control our thought process. Orwell demonstrates quite brilliantly, through his invention of Newspeak how we rely on language for the for our memory and ability to interpret events, and more importantly how language can be used to empower or control our ability to express ourselves.

Orwell's skill as an author is absolutely unparalleled in his ability to stimulate my mind and speak to me on a very deep level. His prose are sometime visceral and harsh, but he never fails to vividly paint this nightmare reality.

n  The Charactersn

The focus of this story is Winston, a meek and on the surface obedient member of the government's Ministry of Truth. He is constantly aware of the constant surveillance he is under and through his inner monologue you really feel the pressure he is under to contain and hide his beliefs. Winston is the vehicle Orwell uses to highlight the horrors of this totalitarian regime.

Winston is just old enough to remember a time before the current government seized control. He has fond memories of the past and longs to return to those times. I found him someone I could easily relate to.



Unlike Winston, his liver Julia is more concerned with her own desires and wants in terms of her rebellion. Her aims are to have the freedom to enjoy herself as she pleases and does not demonstrate the depth of inner turmoil that we see in Winston. It's a strange relationship to say the least and amusing how this odd couple form the only resistance against the severe political oppression.

n   "It was true that she regarded the whole war as a sham: but apparently she had not even noticed that the name of the enemy had changed."n

The only other character of note in 1984 is the mysterious O’Brien. He is first introduced as Winston’s superior and a member of the "inner party." But Winston immediately suspects that O’Brien has a similar stance to himself and is someone who could prove a friend against his fight back against the machine that enslaves them.

n  Final Thoughtsn

I'll finish by saying that 1984 is one of the best books I've read in my short reading career and almost certainly the most important. Orwell explores the themes of mass media control and government surveillance brilliantly, looking at how a totalitarian regime can rewrite history, to manipulate our beliefs and control our lives. Doing this, he spells out exactly why the government shouldn't be involved in our private lives.

I was expecting 1984 to be dated but it was certainly not despite its title. In fact it is probably more relevant now than it has ever been. I bet people reading this in 1949 thought that the reality described was far fetched and would never happen. But for us reading in 2022 it certainly doesn't appear that far out there.

It's packed with social commentary that's probably more relatable now then when it was first published. It provides a stark warning to us all and is a reminder of why we should always be concerned when those in charge start banning books. But it's no surprise when Orwell is promoting skepticism of those governments and the things they do to supposedly "help" you that in reality hurt us all.

Before I go, a subject covered in this book that's of importance in the current climate is war. Orwell describes how they are fought because they are required to maintain social order, structure, and the economy for those in charge. A "benevolent" way of using up funds that otherwise would have improved the lives of those at the bottom. Surely not. That's too much for my tiny mind to take. No more Mr Orwell, I want to go back to my happy ignorant life!

n  "The essential act of war is destruction, not necessarily of human lives, but of the products of human labour. War is a way of shattering to pieces, or pouring into the stratosphere, or sinking in the depths of the sea, materials which might otherwise be used to make the masses too comfortable, and hence, in the long run, too intelligent."n

Anyway, I have never been made to think more and challenge my belief system when reading a novel. For that this one gets all the stars and not just a firm recommendation but a place amongst those books that must be read. Certainly before it is banned again and wiped from history, never to have existed again.

Thanks for reading. Cheers!


The magnificent and irrepressible George Orwell

Debo decir que he leído este libro dos veces. La primera vez que lo leí, tenía unos 16 años, tuve que leerlo cuando estaba en la secundaria. Lo leí otra vez hace unos 3-4 años, y debo decir que realmente me gustó. Este libro está definitivamente entre mis 10 favoritos. Me encantó la historia, a pesar de que es triste y frustrante, la historia es perfecta y admiré a Orwell cuando "conocí" al gran Winston Smith. Ese personaje es perfecto, uno de los mejores que haya leído jamás, quizás es como todos nosotros: un chico normal, un poco ingenuo y a veces muy inteligente. Es sencillamente hermoso cómo lucha contra el Gran Hermano. Y el final, ¡AMÉ EL FINAL!. Estoy seguro que lloré cuando leí las últimas 2 páginas del libro. ¡Qué historia, qué clímax, qué contexto y qué mensaje!

What can I say about this book that hasn't already been said by others much smarter than I am? For me it was a 'pathway' book that set me on the on the road of healthy doubt; don't always believe the government/media complex will truthfully reveal the medium for the message. Really believe that Orwell forsaw the spread of fake news we now all are bombarded with everyday.

Read as part of The Infinite Variety Reading Challenge, based on the BBC's Big Read Poll of 2003.

n  "For, if leisure and security were enjoyed by all alike, the great mass of human beings who are normally stupefied by poverty would become literate and would learn to think for themselves; and when once they had done this, they would sooner or later realise that the privileged minority had no function, and they would sweep it away."n

Nineteen Eighty-Four is an insanely relevant novel in this day and age, but it's also a rather soothing novel that contains some of the horrors that could never come to pass, though there are some horrific parallels between the England in the book and some countries around the world in the 21st Century.

Winston is a very complex, sane person in a world full of insanity and utter destitution. Julia is on par with Winston, but other than the charming and mysterious O'Brien, no other character is developed enough to be anything but a filler, someone to push the plot along. In any other novel this would be a bad thing, but in this world it is perfect, and it's exactly what those people are in any case.

It is so superbly written I cannot fault it at all concerning that. At the beginning I was drawn in so far that I was almost in love. It was a five-star book up until Julia turned up: whilst I completely understand her character and her paradoxical nature (being so openly physically against Big Brother and yet intelligence-wise and mentally not), I did not like her even remotely, but I understood her character fully. The other thing that put me off was the huge info-dump. Whilst I completely understood that this was an intentional info-drop and it really could not have been conveyed to either the reader or the character in any other way, it really made the whole thing very disjointed. Again, it felt hugely intentional but I still did not enjoy it.

Overall, there's really nothing I can fault except my own opinions. Good writing is Fact: punctuation in the correct places, the right use of words, syntax and all that; building up worlds and characters to a certain degree of solidness. Enjoyment of writing is Opinion: characters being likeable, understandable; worlds being full or non-descript. This was a perfect book that I simply had a few too many low opinions of to be delighted by it completely.



Blog | Instagram | Twitter | Pinterest | Shop | Etsy

"War is peace.
Freedom is slavery.
Ignorance is strength.”

& remember the next time that somebody tells you, “The government wouldn’t do that” Oh yes they would

“He loved big brother”

n  Quotes- n

The chilling themes in the book are timeless and more relevant than ever today.

" انتبه : الأخ الكبير يراقبك ! "
رواية صادمة تمثّل زلزالا للوعي و اللاوعي لدى كلّ من يقرؤها , هذه الرواية التي شكّلت ذروة عبقريّة جورج أورويل و تأثّره و تأثيره في الوعي العالمي و التاريخ الحديث .
الأخ الكبير عند أورويل له مرادفات في ثقافتنا العربية الراهنة ( مثلا : الأخ العقيد , القائد الخالد , القائد الضرورة ... أو الرئيس الشاب ! ) هذا الاختلاف في التسمية هو توافق عبقريّ في مأساويّته لدولة " أوقيانيا " مع دول مثل : سورية و العراق و ليبيا و تونس و مصر ... و باقي أنظمتنا الثوريّة التي تأكلنا و تفتّتنا و تسحقنا منذ عقود , هذا التوافق في سايكولوجية الاستبداد و خلق القطيع و و تنصيب الصنم للجماهير , و توجيه غضبها نحو الوجهة التي ترضي " الأخ الكبير " , هذا التوافق في مفهوم "الحقيقة" الذي تلعب على أوتاره كلّ الأنظمة الشموليّة لتختصر البلد و تاريخه و ثقافته و حضارته و حروبه و سلامه في العقليّة الجمعيّة بأفق الحزب الحاكم و الوثن الأعلى فيه . ( أتذكّر هنا شعارات مثل : عراق صدّام أو سورية الأسد !! ) ـ
كيف نصنع الخوف .. كيف نقتل التفكير .. كيف تمحو اللغة .. كيف نجمّد الزمن .. كيف نصنع حدود النظرة
:
" الله هو السلطة "
هذاكان شعار الحزب , و هو الشعار المطبّق في كلّ الأنظمة الشمولية , لا إله سوى السلطة .. تخلق ما تشاء و تقرّر ما تشاء و تفعل ما تشاء , ولا يعلم حدود الرئيس و قدرته إلّا هو , هو الواحد الأحد و الفرد الصمد المحيي المميت الرزاق القهّار وحده !
هذه الأنظمة لا تريد أن تحكمك و تنهبك فقط , إنّها تريد أن تمسخ إنسانيّتك لتكون مجرّد روبوت مسيّر بيدها و لذلك كتب ونستون في مذكّراته :
" هم يريدون أن يلغوا إنسانيّتك .. ولذلك فأن تحافظ على إنسانيّتك حتى موتك هو ما يعني انتصارك عليهم , حتى لو لم يؤدّ ذلك إلى أيّ نتائج ! "
لماذا نعذّب لماذا نسرق لماذا نستبدّ لماذا نقتل لماذا نحكم طيلة حياتنا ثمّ نورّث الجمهوريّة لأبنائنا ؟!:
" إننا ندرك أنه ما من احد ي��سك بزمام السلطة و هو ينتوي التخلّي عنها , إن السلطة ليست وسيلة بل غاية , فالمرء لا يقيم حكما استبداديا لحماية الثورة , و إنما يشعل الثورة لإقامة حكم استبدادي , إن الهدف من الاضطهاد هو الاضطهاد , و الهدف من التعذيب هو التعذيب , و غاية السلطة هي السلطة ... هل بدأت تفهم ما أقول الآن ؟!! "
هذا جواب أوبراين !
1984 رواية يجب على كلّ عربيّ أن يقرأها ليرى رموزه و أصنامه مرسومة , و ليجد نفسه أيضا مرسوما داخلها كما شاءت أنظمة الثورة و حكم الحزب الواحد و الفرد الواحد .
1984 بكلّ ما تنبّا و كتب و تعمّق و حلّل أورويل فيها عمل عبقريّ يقرأ و يقرأ و يقرأ .
الشيء الوحيد الذي لم يتوقّعه أورويل : هو أن التونسيّين و المصريين و اليمنيين و الجزائريين ( و آمل أن أكتب فيما بعد و السوريين و اللليبيّين... و .. و.. الخ ) سوف يثبتون بدمهم و حرّيتهم خطأ " النهاية " !!!ـ

The colour of this book is grey, relentless grey: of skin, sky, food, floor, walls, mind, life itself. Added piquancy comes from general decay, drudgery, exploitation, chronic sickness, and malaise.


Ten Shades of Grey?

There is also sex and (non-sexual) bondage, domination, and torture.

I don’t expect a dystopian book to be happy reading, but this reread was far grimmer than I remembered it, partly because I read it immediately after the lyrical beauty of another dystopia, Fahrenheit 451, reviewed HERE, and partly because I’ve probably watched Terry Gilliam’s magical film, Brazil so many times (though he claimed he had not read the book before making the film).

Nevertheless, more than 50 years after it was written, 1984 is still powerful, important, and relevant - a feat EL James’ “Fifty Shades” books are unlikely to achieve. On the other hand, I gather Fifty Shades lacks page after page of heavy-handed political theory, so on that criterion, it might be ahead of 1984.

“If there is hope, it lies in the proles” - they are not any shade of grey.

The novel that inspired this

Orwell admitted to being heavily inspired by Yevgeny Zamyatin’s WE. The plot is very similar, but WE is a more complex combination of utopia and dystopia, and Natasha Randall's translation has a lyrical beauty very different from Orwell's much greyer, darker mood. See my review HERE.

Have We Reached 1984? (written in 2015)

In some ways, this book is very dated.

•tThe underlying misogyny is unchallenged (Winston “disliked nearly all women, and especially the young pretty ones… who were the most bigoted adherents of the Party” and he quickly goes from wanting to rape and murder a woman (he even tells her!) to lusting after “her youthful body desperate for him” and feeling “he had a right to” her). On the other hand, Winston is uncritical - enthusiastic even - about her promiscuity.

•tRelated to that - and to Fahrenheit 451 - Derek (Guilty of thoughtcrime) wrote in a group discussion: "there's a distinct echo in both books of the Garden of Eden story, with Eve tempting Adam to eat of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. And in each case, it's a denial of the dogma that this is the original sin."

•tA contemporary writer would probably avoid the lengthy passages of exposition and theory found here (especially ~20 pages of closely typed text from Goldstein’s snappily titled “The Theory and Practice of Oligarchical Collectivism”).

•tThe post-war Cold War fears are ancient history, and the rise of supposedly Islamic groups like Daesh/ISIS/ISIL pose a different sort of threat.

BUT, where this is still pertinent, it’s not quite in the ways that Orwell might have expected.

•tWe’re blasé about ubiquitous CCTV cameras, and we voluntarily, enthusiastically, surrender details of our interests, activities, location, and friends via our smartphone apps, and Google (see Vox article about how Google Trends reveals the truths that people don't tell researchers, here).

•tWe think we’re too smart to fall for lies like those of the Party, but a quick trawl of trending stories on social media demonstrates the untruth of that: people are gullible. The patent nonsense that people believe and share, without ever engaging the weakest of critical faculties is staggering. Most of those are trivial compared with the lies of Big Brother, but they show how easy it is to believe what everyone else believes, regardless of ample evidence to the contrary.

•tWe may not have Two Minutes’ Hate or Hate Week, but we certainly have hate figures, and again, social media exacerbates the crowd mentality: “The horrible thing… was not that one was obliged to act a part, but… that it was impossible to avoid joining in”. I’ve not read Jon Ronson’s n  So You've Been Publicly Shamedn, but I’m familiar with many of the stories in it (if you’re not, look at the many excellent reviews on GR). Scary stuff.

Update, January 2017, “Alternative Facts”

On 20 January 2017, Donald Trump was inaugurated as President of the USA. He campaigned in the style of an autocratic, narcissistic demagogue. He had a long track record of flagrantly denying obvious, provable truths, even on trivial matters. The day after numerous photos and other measures showed unimpressive attendance at his inauguration, rather than blame poor weather or practical and financial difficulties of travel, Sean Spicer, White House Press Secretary flat-out denied realistic estimates, refused to take questions, and threatened to crack down on the press. The resulting furore led to Kellyanne Conway, a Trump Strategist, defended him, saying he had merely presented "Alternative Facts".

“The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command… And yet he was in the right! They were wrong and he was right. The obvious, the silly, and the true had got to be defended. Truisms are true, hold on to that! The solid world exists, its laws do not change. Stones are hard, water is wet, objects unsupported fall towards the earth's centre. With the feeling that he was speaking to O'Brien, and also that he was setting forth an important axiom, he wrote: .....Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.”

“If the Party could thrust its hand into the past and say of this or that event, it never happened – that, surely, was more terrifying than mere torture and death? ”

“The Ministry of Peace concerns itself with war, the Ministry of Truth with lies, the Ministry of Love with torture and the Ministry of Plenty with starvation. These contradictions are not accidental, nor do they result from ordinary hypocrisy: they are deliberate exercises in doublethink.”

“Being in a minority, even in a minority of one, did not make you mad. There was truth and there was untruth, and if you clung to the truth even against the whole world, you were not mad.”

UnTruth and UnReality - Three Types

•t“The mutability of the past” means history is forever being rewritten corrected for slips, errors, misprints and misquotes, making truth unknowable (Winston is not even sure of his age or year of birth).

•tThe doublethink slogans of the Party are another deliberate type of unreality.

•tThe third confusion of reality is subtler, in stark contrast to the gritty realism of the rest of the book, and not one I’d really considered on previous readings. It relates to dreams, premonitions, hallucinations, and (in)sanity. Confusion from deprivation and torture is one thing, but there are possible magical-realist aspects. Early on, Winston dreams of meeting O’Brien “in the place where there is no darkness”; later mentions are ambiguous as to whether this is coincidence or something else. A country landscape is also familiar from a dream, and he has a muddled dream about the coral paperweight, his mother and a Jewish woman. Furthermore, there are times in prison when the interrogator’s knowledge seems too precise and secret to be inferred from spies, screens or microphones: can he read Winston’s mind?!

“Reality exists in the human mind and nowhere else. ”

“If there is hope, it lies in the proles”

“The proles were not loyal to a party or a country or an idea, they were loyal to one another… The proles had stayed human. ” As unimportant drones, they have freedom denied to Party members and “were beneath suspicion”.

Conditions in Airstrip One are dire, with food and basic services in very limited supply, but sanity is scarcest of all. “Stupidity was as necessary as intelligence, and as difficult to attain. ”

For some, “By lack of understanding they remained sane”.

Three Parts

•tThe first part sets the scene of Winston’s Smith’s predictable life as an unimportant Party member in Big Brother’s terrifying regime in Airstrip One, ever at war with either Eurasia or Eastasia.

•tThe second part concerns actions: freedom, courage, love/lust, betrayal.

•tThe final part is about the consequences of those actions.

Again and again, brief, apparently trivial things turn out to be significant.

Newspeak

“But if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought.”

“Newspeak is the only language in the world whose vocabulary gets smaller every year”, with the aim of making “thoughtcrime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it”.

This is really an extreme form of linguistic determinism (aka Sapir-Whorf hypothesis): the idea that the structure of a language can affect the cognition of those who use it. A very different extrapolation of that is in Ted Chiang's The Story of Your Life (filmed for 2016 as Arrival), reviewed HERE.

I thought the linguistic aspect would be something I’d especially enjoy this time, but the key features are familiar and it’s explained in an appendix (which is where most of the lengthy extracts of Goldstein’s book should have gone, imo.) However, it's worth noting that the appendix, written after the main story, is in conventional English. Newspeak is/was no more.

For insight into 21st Century Political Language, see my review of Steven Pool's excellent Unspeak: How Words Become Weapons, How Weapons Become a Message, and How That Message Becomes Reality from 2006, HERE.

Feelings – and Troublesome Questions

This is a grey, cold book. Even the lust and passion it contains is chilling. But it asks timeless and difficult questions about love and loyalty:

•tWould you risk everything - absolutely everything - for a few passionate meetings with someone you may not even love?

•tTo serve your ideology, would you lie, murder, steal… throw acid in a child’s face?

•tIf you could save your partner by doubling your own pain, would you? Would you really?

•tIs failure of love the only betrayal that counts? (If you tell all, but secretly love, are you loyal?)

Quotes

Some are so well-known, it might seem superfluous to type them here, but that’s exactly why I’ve included them.

•t“It was a bright cold day in April and the clocks were striking thirteen.”
•t“Although the sun was shining and the sky a harsh blue, there seemed to be no colour in anything, except the posters that were plastered everywhere.”
•t“An active man of almost paralysing stupidity.”
•t“All history was a palimpsest.”
•t“It was not by making yourself heard but by staying sane that you carried on the human heritage.”
•t“The old man’s memory was nothing but a rubbish-heap of details.”
•t“A hanging oil lamp which gave off an unclean but friendly smell.”
•t“He would buy further scraps of beautiful rubbish.” (In addition to coral in glass.)
•t“It was camouflage. If you kept the small rules, you could break the big ones.”
•tA dash of lipstick and “she had become not only much prettier, but… far more feminine.”
•tCharrington, the junk shop owner had “vaguely the air of being a collector rather than a tradesman”.
•t“The end was contained in the beginning.”
•t“Our only true life was in the future.”
•t“Winston was gelatinous with fatigue… His body seemed to have not only the weakness of a jelly, but its transparency.”
•t“The best books, he [Winston] perceived, are those that tell you what you know already.” No, no, no!
•t“The blade would bite into him with a sort of burning coldness.”
•t“Never, for any reason on earth, could you wish for an increase in pain… Nothing in the world was so bad as physical pain.” Hmm. What about emotional pain?
•t“If you want to keep a secret you must also hide it from yourself.”
•t“The confession was a formality. The torture was real.”
•t“Perhaps one did not want to be loved so much as to be understood.”
•t“In the old days the heretic walked to the stake still a heretic… But we make the brain perfect before we blow it out.” Shades of Kafka’s In the Penal Colony, reviewed HERE.

Slogans

•t“War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.”
•t“Who controls the past controls the future; who controls the present controls the past.”
•t“2 + 2 = 5” “Sometimes they are five. Sometimes they are three. Sometimes they are all of them at once.”
•t“It is not enough to obey him: you must love him.”
•t“We are interested solely in power… Power is not a means, it is an end.”
•t“Outside man there is nothing… The earth is the centre of the universe.”
•t“Big Brother is watching.”

Image source: http://www.artsparx.com/images/bl_val...

OLD Review from 2008
The year 1984 may be long passed, but this book is more pertinent than ever: big brother is watching us, history is rewritten (though that has always been true) and free speech is constrained (albeit often under the misused guise of political correctness).

It's a shame that the humorous TV programme "Room 101" and reality TV franchise "Big Brother" have distracted people from the seriousness of Orwell's message.

1984

نشر أورويل هذه الرواية بعد أربع سنوات من نشر روايته (مزرعة الحيوان)، كانت مزرعة الحيوان عن انهيار الحلم الشيوعي، وتبعثره على يد الستالينيين، وكيف أن المجتمع الشيوعي أصبح أسوأ بكثير من المجتمع الرأسمالي، وأنه ليست أرزاق العمال والفلاحين المهددة الآن تحت ظل الشيوعية، وإنما حرياتهم بل وحياتهم ذاتها.

احتاج النظام السوفييتي إلى عشرين عام فقط بعد الثورة (1917 – 1937 م)، ليظهر أقبح وجوهه في مهزلة محاكمات موسكو، وحملات التطهير التي قتل فيها ما يقترب من المليوني شخص في الاتحاد السوفييتي، فلذا عندما نشر أورويل كتابه هذا في سنة 1949 م، كان يتوقع بأن 35 سنة كافية ليتحول العالم كله إلى الصورة المرعبة التي رسمها في روايته هذه، حيث تنقسم الكرة الأرضية إلى ثلاث دول فقط، إيستاسيا وهي الدولة التي تضم بلاد شرق آسيا وجنوبها من الصين واليابان والهند وغيرها من الدول المحيطة، وأوراسيا وهي الدولة التي تسيطر على روسيا وأوروبا، وأوقيانيا التي تسيطر على الأمريكتين والجزيرة البريطانية.

بطل الرواية وينستون سميث خمسيني يعيش في لندن ضمن حدود دولة أوقيانيا، والتي يسيطر عليها حزب وحيد يقوده الأخ الأكبر، والذي يحمل ملامح ستالينية لا يمكن أن يخطئها القارئ، الأخ الأكبر تتمحور حوله عبادة الشخصية كما ظهرت في الفترة الستالينية، وصوره في كل مكان من الدولة، وتحتها العبارة الشهيرة (الأخ الأكبر يراقبك)، وطيلة الرواية لا ندري هل الأخ الأكبر موجود أم لا؟ ربما يكون ميتاً منذ زمن بعيد، ولكن عبادة الشخصية تحوله إلى كائن أسطوري خالد، وتمحور كل شيء حول شخصه، وهي حالة مخزية جداً، لازالت موجودة في واقعنا المعاصر وإن بدرجات متفاوتة، ومثالها البارز كوريا الشمالية.

نتعرف مع وينستون على الحالة الغريبة التي وصل إليها ذلكم المجتمع الشمولي، حيث أربع وزارات تدير البلد، وزارة السلم وهي المسئولة عن الحرب، وزارة الوفرة وهي المسئولة عن الاقتصاد، الذي نعرف من خلال الرواية أنه بعيد تماماً عن الوفرة، وزارة الحقيقة وهي مشابهة لوزارة الإعلام ولكنها متخصصة في نشر الأكاذيب والشائعات، وأخيراً وزارة الحب وهي الوزارة المرعبة التي تشرف على شرطة الفكر، وعلى عمليات التعذيب المنهجية للمعارضين، والتي تتابع الناس من خلال شاشات الرصد الموجودة في كل مكان حتى في منازل أتباع الحزب.

قد تبدو لنا تسمية الوزارات ساخرة، حيث تقوم كل وزارة بمهام معاكسة لاسمها، ولكننا نكتشف أن وراء التسمية فلسفة رهيبة، هي فلسفة التفكير المزدوج، التي يحاول الحزب من خلالها قتل كل فكر مناهض، هذه الفلسفة نفهمها ونفهم المراد منها في الفصول الأخيرة من الرواية.

في هذا المجتمع المخيف، يحاول وينستون المشوش، والذي يعمل في وزارة الحقيقة، حيث يقوم بمهام تعديل الأخبار القديمة لتتوافق مع معطيات الحاضر، وهي مهمة يحرص عليها الحزب ليتلاعب بالتاريخ ويجعله يأتي وفقاً لفلسفته وخططه، يحاول وينستون البحث عن الحقيقة، التساؤل، هل كان الأمر هكذا دائماً؟ لا يوجد ذاكرة للمجتمع، لقد تلاعب بها الحزب، أعاد كتابة التاريخ ليجعله يبدأ من الثورة التي أتت بالحزب، وسلطته على رقاب الناس، فلذا صار وينستون لا يعرف إلا أطياف من المعلومات عن أوضاع ما قبل الثورة، ما قبل الحزب، وفي رحلته في البحث عن الحقيقة، تنشأ قصة حب خفية بينه وبين جوليا، وهي فتاة من الحزب، تتظاهر بأنها مؤمنة بالمبادئ قلباً وقالباً، ولكنها هي من يقود وينستون في قصة الحب هذه التي يخفيانها عن شاشات الرصد، وعن شرطة الفكر.

في أثناء هذا يلتقي وينستون بأوبراين، أحد قادة الدائرة الداخلية للحزب، والذي يكشف له أنه مؤمن بأفكار عدو الحزب الأساس (عمانوئيل جولدشتين)، والوصف الذي يعطينا إياه المؤلف لجولدشتين هذا يذكرنا بتروتسكي، يمني أوبراين وينستون بثورة قادمة، ويعطيه كتاباً لجولدشتين يقرؤه وينستون أثناء لقاءاته بجوليا.

يتم القبض على وينستون وجوليا أثناء أحد لقاءاتهما، حيث يكتشفان أنهما كانا مراقبين منذ البداية، وأن كل ما فعلاه رصدته شرطة الفكر، بل والأسوأ هو أن أوبراين ذاته من شرطة الفكر، وهو من سيتولى تعذيب وتحطيم شخصية وينستون.

يصف لنا المؤلف وبدقة التعذيب الذي يتعرض له وينستون، وهو ليس تعذيب جسدي فقط، وإنما هو عملية منهجية يتم فيها غسل دماغ وينستون، وتلقينه التفكير المزدوج الذي يجعله يصدق أن 2 زائد 2 يساوي خمسة عندما يقول له الحزب ذلك، لا يكفي أن يقولها خوفاً، لا... وإنما يجب أن يؤمن بها في قلبه، وهذا هو الطريق الذي سيحمله إلى محبة الأخ الأكبر.

هذه العملية المرعبة نتابع نتائجها المؤلمة على وينستون حتى النهاية، المرعب هو أننا نعرف من خلال التاريخ أن أورويل لم يبتكر كل هذا، فبرامج التعذيب هذه مطبقة خلال الفترة السوفياتية، حتى أن المعذبين كانوا عندما يعدمون، يبكون، لا على أنفسهم، وإنما لأنهم يشعرون بأنهم خذلوا الأخ الأكبر، خذلوا الزعيم الأبدي.

WAR IS PEACE.

FREEDOM IS SLAVERY.

IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH.

Those words keep sounding in my head since I read this book. Gosh, probably the most haunting not to mention frightening book I've ever read. 1984 should also be included in the horror genre.

1984 describes a Utopia. Not Thomas More's version of Utopia, but this is one is the antithesis, i.e. Dystopia. Imagine living in a country, whose leaders apply a totalitarian system in regulating their citizen, in the most extreme ways, which make Hitler, Mao, Stalin and that old bloke in V for Vendetta look like sissies.

Working, eating, drinking, sleeping, talking, thinking, procreating...in short living, all are controlled by the state. Any hint of obedience or dislike can be detected by various state apparatus such as the Thought Police, telescreen, or even your children, who will not hesitate to betray you to the authorities. Even language is modified in such ways that you cannot express yourself, since individualism is a crime.

The past is controlled, rewritten into something that will strengthen the incumbent ruler. Who controls the past, controls the future. Who controls the present, controls the past. There is no real truth. The "truth" is what the state says it is. Black is white, 2+2=5, if the state says so.

The world in 1984 is divided into three states, originated from the ashes from World War II: Oceania (British Isles, the Americas, Pacific, Australia), Eurasia (Europe & Russia), and Eastasia (the rest of it). Continuous warfare between those three (who hold similar ideologies) is required to keep the society's order and peace. Si vis pacem para bellum. That's describes the first slogan.

The second slogan, freedom is slavery, means the only way to be free is by letting you lose yourself and to be integrated within the Party. That way, you'll be indestructible and immortal.

Ignorance is strength, means the division on high, middle, low classes in society will never be changed. The middle wants to be the high and they'll act "on behalf of the low" to dethrone the high. Afterwards, a new middle class arises, all will change except the low. The high and middle make and uphold the law, the low (proletarian) is just too stupid to revolt. The state maintains its structure by torture, intimidation, violence, and brainwashing.

Blimey, Orwell's Animal Farm is already depressing, but 1984 gives "depression" a new meaning, at least for me.

"1984" es una novela sobre libertad. Orwell relata la vida de una persona que vive bajo el yugo del control de todo lo que hace en la vida. Vive así hasta que se da cuenta de que busca algo más y aparece en su vida una mujer.
Esta novela es todo un clásico de la literatura universal por todo el simbolismo que encierra en sí misma.
Como objeción, diría que le sobran páginas ya que, a ratos, la lectura se hace pesada por la repetición excesiva de los mismos conceptos.

------------------------------------

"1984" is a novel about freedom. Orwell recounts the life of a person who lives under the yoke of control over everything he does in life. He lives like this until he realises that he is looking for something more and a woman appears in his life.
This novel is a classic of world literature for all the symbolism it contains.
As an objection, I would say that it has too many pages, as at times the reading becomes tiresome due to the excessive repetition of the same concepts.