George Orwell's classic dystopian novel Nineteen Eighty-Four was released sixty years ago this week. It's doubleplusgood. To say otherwise is crimethink and will result in being sent to a joycamp.
I recommend trying his other works too, the non-fiction. Especially Down and out in Paris and London, or Homage to Catalonia, also his short essays. It's all good stuff.
I've never understood how intelligent could possibly rate this book so highly. At its best, it's naive and ill-informed. At its worst, it's ham-fisted propaganda. The most favourable thing I can say for 1984 is that I can imagine its ideas were innovative and bold when it was published. Since then, it's been done over and over again, usually as part of a larger plot, and usually better.
1525, please tell us what's the "propaganda" in 1984, since it's been understood to be precisely the opposite of that, i.e., an indictement of all forms of propaganda and groupthink. Also, being a work of fiction that takes place in a dystopian future, I don't see how it could be "ill-informed"...
kat:- Yup - Brazil was a far better film of 1984 than the film of 1984 that came out in 1984 was. Then again, it's by Gilliam, so it'd be hard pushed to be bad.
Mytake, it could very easily be anti-propaganda propaganda. I think our definitions of propaganda have probably loosened up. Now it means "whatever the other side is saying".
It could be ill-informed if it were based on imperfectly formed or poorly researched premises.
ted, no, sorry, neither explaination attempt cuts it.
"Anti-propaganda propaganda" sounds uncannily like the newspeak Orwell was denouncing. If you read the book, you see he clearly does not take the side of States or institutions, his focus is on the individual.
Again, "ill-informed" and "premises" make no sense in a dystopian novel. I invite you try and present examples of misinformation taken from the book itself instead of just pointing out a vague possibility.
Needles to say, it's one of the truly essential readings of all time.
I've always wanted to read this book and now I have an easy way to do so on my netbook.
What?
Magnus frater spectat te
just another reason why people born june 12, 1984 are so awesome... yes... yes we are.
It could be ill-informed if it were based on imperfectly formed or poorly researched premises.
"Anti-propaganda propaganda" sounds uncannily like the newspeak Orwell was denouncing. If you read the book, you see he clearly does not take the side of States or institutions, his focus is on the individual.
Again, "ill-informed" and "premises" make no sense in a dystopian novel. I invite you try and present examples of misinformation taken from the book itself instead of just pointing out a vague possibility.
Now I can't look at Orwell's picture without seeing James Cromwell and Frank Zappa.