Animal Farm/1984

I read Animal Farm once a decade. It is a quick read that constantly reminds me that I need to keep the blinders off and not take everything for granted.

I have a strange desire for bacon for some reason.

I'd never read 1984 before, altho I had read Animal Farm many years ago. Decided in this year of 2025 that the time was now to read this novel about an autocratic society. And in that regard, there is much to say about the book in terms of our current world where "alternative facts" and outright lies and "opinions" about truth have become standard with some citizens--so much so that images of what is a violent coup attempt are called "peaceful protest." I kept ripping off the ends of my bookmark to put in the passages I wanted to remember or come back to.

I will not put all those passages into this review except to note the repetition of the 2 + 2 = 5 idea. This equation is used as an example of the lie that the State can get its citizens to believe--or at least to attest to. Winston says at one point in his secret diary:

"The obvious, the silly, and the true had got to be defended. Truisms are true. Hold onto that!
Stones are hard, water is wet, objects unsupported fall toward the earth's center. 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.'"

I mention this passage because the edition of the book I read had an interesting and informative introduction to this particular joint publication of Orwell's two works by Christopher Hitchens, British author and journalist, written in 2003. In the introduction, Hitchens provides a brief overview of the publishing and importance of these two most well-known Orwell titles.

Hitchens said 1984 was just an inversion of 1948, the year the book was written, which was of course after WWII and was in the midst of the beginning of the Cold War and rise of the USSR. Hitchens also asserts 1984 came out of
"Orwell's literary knowledge of Russia and of the Soviet Union. The manipulation of numbers
by the authorities (most famously the Party's ability to insist that Two and Two can if
necessary make Five) is anticipated in Dostoyevsky's Notes from Underground. And Evgeny
Zamyatin's We, an early dystopian fantasy written in the early years of Communism, was
among Orwell's acknowledged inspirations. During the hideous period of Stalin's 'Five Year
Plan,' it was at one point claimed by the authorities that the goal of the plan had been attained
early, in two heroic two-year spurts. This huge lie was sometimes rendered for the stupider
believers as 2 + 2 =5."

Having listed what I learned and my reaction to the book as being too scarily close to today's political situation here, I will go ahead and say, I could not wait for this book to be over once I got past the explanation of the world as it was--the Newspeak, the rationale behind continuous wars as a means to keep people active producing things, etc. The political part stands on its own, but I did not find Winston very sympathetic nor did I find his love affair with Julia very believable. It was too lacking in what seemed true passion, compassion, real emotion. It seems primarily a novel of ideas, and that is not necessarily what provides a binding, emotional response to the book or the characters. My rating is what it is for the novel of ideas part.

In my opinion, some “classics” get their name but don’t live up to them. Animal Farm doesn’t fit that category. Animal Farm is short and so clearly communicates the point it’s trying to get across and it does a great job. The slow decline from one “master” into another, the ability to be free, but just as bad or worse off than when they were under Mr. Jones. Orwell does a great job showing how quickly a society can collapse under a bad ruler.

Similarly, 1984 is a book that I think had some slow parts, but was overall, exciting. Winston lives in a world where he is always seen and monitored. He wrestles with life and what it might look like to betray this government but often feels hopeless. This book has some very dark turns but does a great job showing what a totalitarian regime could be like if it really succeeded in its plans. By the end, I didn’t want to stop reading.

Оруэлла однозначно можно зачислить в ряды прорицателей... Написать произведения, которые были бы настолько актуальны во все времена-это нужно обладать даром. Его Скотный двор-гениален!!! Любая революция в своей эволюции и деградации, как на ладони. Вся книга - сплошная цитата. Читать!!!

No books hit as hard. Not even Metamorphosis by Kafka. The allegorical imagery can require interpretation, but it hits hard even without it. When I read Metamorphosis, the emotion was "despair". Orwell isn't about despair. It's plainly about the death of hope. And nothing hits harder than that.

n  Animal Farmn
Animal Farm and 1984 are contrasted in the foreward to edition, and it's rightly pointed out that Animal Farm was written with more time at hand, but 1984 had to be completed before the end of his life which was nearing. The narrations reflect this reality.

Animal Farm's imagery makes a huge impact on the reader's mind. Each animal is extremely well chosen for the role that they play in the story. The two distinctive feature of Orwell's narration are:

1) It's a factual narration. There is no undue emphasis of painting a canvas for your imagination beyond what it required – utilitarian maximus
2) Repetition infused with crucial differences, leading to increasingly absurd results

The brevity of the book is crucial. The imagery is so powerful and the absurdity so potent that when your hopes are crushed, you won't even have time to lick your wounds. It's like when a doctor distracts you to put an injection, and by the time you realise what's up it's over.

n  1984n
1984 is a book I'd read earlier. The only difference here is that your hope isn't crushed. It is patiently hollowed out so that you're a shell of what you were when you began.

1984 paints a larger universe and has more moving parts. The narration is very fast paced, and the repetition here is of a different kind - it is more systematised than that in Animal Farm. You know how bad it's going to get, so any hope that you have undergoes a deep extraction, unlike being merely dashed as was done in Animal Farm.

1984 is the more popular of Orwell's works, and has gained much significance in India in the recent past. Personally, I picked this up some years ago when a judgment recognising the Right to Privacy came out. "Orwellian" and "Big Brother" kept doing the rounds, so I had to seek out the source to know what it's about.

The beauty of both these works is their continuing relevance. No matter where you are on Earth, if you're a part of a controlled system that either good or gone to the dogs, you'll find here something about why that's the way it is.

1984 is also very often quoted, and I made a reference to it while researching on a speech to be made by a judge I was interning with. My takeaway from the book in the context of "language" is reflected in this line that was spoken:

"Thoughts are not abstract wisps of consciousness, but are in fact conceptualized and grounded in a particular language along with its unique characteristics. ...In a historically multilingual society like in India, where language is so intrinsic to one’s own self of history and identity– the plurality of language is the plurality of thought itself.

George Orwell in his classic 1984 highlighted the significance of language. In his dystopian world, the fictional language “Newspeak” was a controlled language of restricted grammar and limited vocabulary. It was meant to be a vehicle of thought control, meant to limit personal identity, self-expression and free will. For example, the only meaning of the word ‘free’ in Newspeak was to denote the absence of something – this field is free of weeds. Politically, the word was not envisaged to denote free will. Consequently, any such political notion was eliminated from society. Other words that were deliberately omitted from the Newspeak language included justice, science and democracy. Liberty and equality were reduced to a single word – ‘crimethink’ which referred to thought which was considered not in line with the principles of society. This highlighted the political value of controlling language and diversity. "

Animal Farm is about the ushering in of a "revolution" that is hijacked, leading to a new regime which is indistinguishable from the old. 1984 is about thought control through pervasive intrusion of the State. As long as society exists, these works will serve as a warning to whoever's listening.

So sobering. Such a timely read. Worth rereading often. We so easily fall into conformity. Leaders can take advantage of it if we are not aware of the tactics used to enslave us,

Вчасно я взялась за цю книжку :) Не полишало відчуття аж якоїсь надмірної актуальності. З іншого боку, віяло вайбом Союзу, і це було дуже неприємно. Так, мабуть слово "неприємно" найкраще описує досвід від читання "1984". Місцями вона ще й досить нудна, місцями - волосся стає дибки, тому я не увійду в армію любителів цієї книги. Хоч прочитати її, звісно, варто.
А от "Колгосп тварин" я вже читала раніше. І як тоді, так і зараз вона мені дуже сподобалась. Ідея перегукується з "1984", але написана в значно легшій формі і залишає по собі хоч сяку-таку надію.

animal farm is a 4 stars, 1984 is 2 due to the depiction of women, 3 stars was my middle ground