English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

criticism of "1984" indicates that there is no description in how the party attains power. It is my asumption that it was not neccassary as Orwell already explained how a party or in "Animal Farm" the pigs were able to take power what do you think

2006-07-23 13:41:19 · 9 answers · asked by chefj 2 in Arts & Humanities Books & Authors

some people criticise "1984" that there is no description in how the party attains power. It is my asumption that it was not neccassary as Orwell already explained how a party or in "Animal Farm" the pigs were able to take power what do you think

2006-07-23 15:04:18 · update #1

the critcisim is not mine it is only part of the question those who have read both books should see the conection and if you can convey that in your answer than you will win best answer

2006-07-25 13:49:30 · update #2

9 answers

I love Animal Farm because of the social studies teacher in me. It is the best allegory I know about the Russia revolution and the subsequent descent into soviet communism. Marx, Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin, and others.... all the major players...... merely revealing (human) animal instinct and showing how absolute power corrupts absolutely.

The connection to 1984 is not as clear as you might think. While Animal Farm provides an historical glimpse into the past, 1984 takes quite a leap into the future by predicting a claustrophobic society in which government has run amok..... a government that no longer represents the people. The "absolute power" theme continues through both books, but Orwell offers no hope in 1984. However, he leaves the door wide open in Animal Farm. Education of the masses, war, economic collapse...... Orwell provides hints throughout that the ills of the Manor Farm could be alleviated if the status quo changed in any of these directions. And...... after all....... history proved him right.

More to the point regarding your question, In Animal Farm the animals clearly seize power...... in 1984, the government maintains power because the citizens abdicate their rights and responsibilities.

2006-07-27 17:43:49 · answer #1 · answered by Katie My Katie 3 · 2 0

In 1948 (and Orwell was casting forward from that year), everyone in the world had seen how Hitler and his Nazis got power and they knew that the Stalinists already had such power. Also Animal Farm had dealt with the theme of the gradual assumption of power through manipulation of the public. So the theme of 1984 is the effect such power has on citizens and how they respond. That's what chilling.

Now in 2006 we are watching power being taken over once again and citizens succumbling willingly, even cooperating. Someone needs to write a book entitled 2036 -- or will this particular New World Order culminate as soon as 2016? Or sooner? Right now, maybe we're still living in Animal Farm, but how long will it take to reach our 1984? Or are we there already?

2006-07-23 14:59:39 · answer #2 · answered by bfrank 5 · 0 0

Hi. I've only read 1984, and watched the movie as well, after reading the book. I must say the film was not as good; one has to be familiar with the plot, as it is written by Orwell, before watching the film.
I consider 1984 a masterpiece, with certain aspects of the book very close to what's happening today around us, in real life. I think it opened up my eyes on some cultural/political issues.
As for your question, the party is already presented as a powerful establishment, and it keeps becoming stronger by distorting reality for their benefit, and enforcing lower social classes to live with less comfort.
It is a book that can give you a lot if you feel rather disgusted with what's around you, but will make you feel even more depressed once you finish it. :D

2006-07-23 14:01:17 · answer #3 · answered by TT 1 · 0 0

I dont think the "technical" details of the such stories are important. What is important is the fact, that both of these books were describing the waz the world will become, if communism would take over the world. However the same still holds in capitalism, even more so than in communism, or like Palahniuk wrote (this is not an exact quote, because I dont know it by heart): "George Orwell had it backwards. Big Brother isnt watching, he is singing and dancing and pulling rabbits out of a hat on live TV. Always making sure, your attention is occupied every minute of the day. That way people control themselfs, only thinking the things the society wants them to think"

Another similarity between modern society and anti-utopia books is the constant fear we are forced. Americans must always be scared (of terrorists), or their president would be impeached (though he should go to jail), even commercials know that scarred people buy more: "if you dont use our perfume no one will like you".

2006-07-23 18:47:21 · answer #4 · answered by ahab_orr 2 · 0 0

I vaguely remember 1984---I do remember that it creeped me out becuase of the whole Big Brother thing.

What killed me about Animal Farm--was the breakdown of the "all animals are equal" philosophy which made the animals take over the farm in the first place. The pigs were corrupted by power--they lived in the house, walked on two legs etc. What a great allegory to what happens to the best of intentions and the lure of power.

2006-07-23 16:50:52 · answer #5 · answered by sidnee_marie 5 · 0 0

Both books are as relevant today as they were in the 1940s.
1984 shows how a whole society can be manipulated for the benefit of the few by the use of propaganda and the fear of both attack from outside and internal repression and coercion.
Animal Farm shows a new society being corrupted from within by a power clique intent on gaining supremacy over fellow citizens; as so often happens after revolutions.

2006-07-23 17:56:58 · answer #6 · answered by brainstorm 7 · 0 0

I loved 1984 because it was so insightful as pertains to the natural human condition and our manipulability...as far as ur criticism is concerned, I didn't feel that the actual government power was the main point, but rather the weakness of the masses, so the HOW of their control wasn't as important...

Not to be rude to the fans, but I couldn't appreciate the approach or overall text of Animal Farm...honestly, I don't know why it never sat well with me, it's just how I've always naturally felt towards the book...it wasn't any one problem, but rather just an overall feeling I got after reading it...

2006-07-23 14:03:08 · answer #7 · answered by ustinya 2 · 0 0

I don't really think that it matters how the party attained power, just the fact that they were in power at all and the methods they used to keep the people under control. If I remember, the narrator himself could only vaguely remember the time before the party took over because they had used propaganda and whatnot to change "history"--he couldn't remember what was real anymore.

2006-07-23 13:54:31 · answer #8 · answered by Nobody 2 · 0 0

we're almost in 1984 now, our government detains people without evidence holds them for years with no outside contact including a lawyer, and says torture is OK because they're exempt from the Geneva conventions rules for pow's. we wire/phone tap even getting library lists randomly.an evil power has used our fear to lay waste to freedoms our forefathers died to protect, leading us to believe this will make us safer, when in reality it sets us further apart from the world. amnesty international a human rights watch dog group named us as one of the worst offenders of human rights the past year. it's truly a time we need to wake up before all of our precious freedoms are completely gone.

2006-07-23 20:56:47 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers