1984

by George Orwell

book data

136,014 ratings, 4.04 average rating, 6,146 reviews (more data...)

rating	frequency	%
5		38%
4		35%
3		19%
2		4%
1		1%

edit

published

January 1st 1950 (first published 1949) by Signet Classics

binding

Paperback, 326 pages

characters

Julia, Winston Smith, Big Brother, O'Brien, ...more

setting

The United Kingdom

isbn

0451524934 (isbn13: 9780451524935)

description

The year 1984 has come and gone, but George Orwell's prophetic, nightmarish vision in 1949 of the world we were becoming is timelier than ever. 1984 ...more

find at: Amazon | Half.com | Barnes & Noble | compare prices ($3.99)…

new topic
discuss this book

topics	posts	views	last activity
The Next Best Boo...: OFFICIAL SUMMER CHALLENGE 2009	3877	4524	6 minutes ago

friend reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

lists with this book

Best Books of the 20th Century

1392 books | 7999 voters

Best Books Ever

3119 books | 10579 voters

More lists...

other reviews (showing 1-20 of 168,474)

sort: default (?) | date
filters: all | text-only

07/28/07

Dave rated it:

In George Orwell's 1984, Winston Smith is an open source developer who writes his code offline because his ISP has installed packet sniffers that are regulated by the government under the Patriot Act. It's really for his own protection, though. From, like, terrorists and DVD pirates and stuff. Like every good American, he drinks Coca-Cola and his processed food has desensitized his palate to all but four flavors: (sweet, salty-so-that-you-will-drink-more-coca-cola, sweet, and Cooler Ranch!(tm...more

Like this review? yes (45 people liked it)

10 comments

12/07/07

Silvana rated it:

bookshelves: classics, own, top-20

Read in June, 2007

recommends it for: everyone

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 horror genre.

1984 describes a Utopia. Not Thomas More's version of Utopia, but this is one is the antithesis, i.e. Negative Utopia. Imagine living in a country, whose leaders apply a totalitarian system in regulating their citizen, ...more 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 horror genre.

1984 describes a Utopia. Not Thomas More's version of Utopia, but this is one is the antithesis, i.e. Negative Utopia. 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.(less)

Like this review? yes (18 people liked it)

3 comments

02/06/08

Marty rated it:

bookshelves: school-bookshelf

Read in July, 2007

This is one of those books that I had always meant to read, but never got around to. Finally, one of my college classes required it, so I was happy to pick it up, though not without some reserved skepticism beforehand. I knew it was one of those books that is constantly referred to by people who are paranoid about government and distrust everything the government does, which wouldn't really describe me, in general. But, I have to admit that Orwell's writing is masterful. Right from the start, th...more This is one of those books that I had always meant to read, but never got around to. Finally, one of my college classes required it, so I was happy to pick it up, though not without some reserved skepticism beforehand. I knew it was one of those books that is constantly referred to by people who are paranoid about government and distrust everything the government does, which wouldn't really describe me, in general. But, I have to admit that Orwell's writing is masterful. Right from the start, the world he presents is mesmerizing. I think I am safe in saying that in the first third of the book, almost nothing happens. Yet, I can also say that the first third of the book was just as interesting as any of the action that comes later. Every detail, every description, every movement is analyzed in the most fascinating way. Orwell is no idiot. He has that very rare ability of few great authors to show the workings of the inner mind of man in such a true and believable way that you very well believe that he could look at you and know what you are thinking. After the first third of the book, when the story actually progresses, it gets exciting almost in the way that a thriller does. You keep on wondering what move will be next and how the character is going to strategize the demise of the enemy. Then the last third of the book is a devastating, but still masterful analysis of the human mind, free will, and reality. At almost every stage, Orwell presents his ideas with a written clarity that is a language all in its own. In spite of this whole experience and my recognition at how skillful the writing and analysis was, I cannot say that I liked the book, or even if I would recommend it. The main reason for this is that I believe Orwell cheated at the end. The protagonist was putting up a fight against the machine, and in spite of its all-powerful, seemingly omnipotent status, he held off. Now, Orwell had two options. The protagonist either would capitulate under the increasingly intelligent pressure put on by the oppressor, or he would outlast and maintain his own free will to the end. I think that the ending Orwell chose was contrived, and what he did to get the protagonist there was unbelievable. Maybe it's my own principles or feelings, but I suspect that if Orwell had done it well enough, I would have at least respected his approach. But as it is now, I had to shake my head and say to myself: No. That's not true to human nature. I don't buy that. And what's worse, I felt that Orwell must have known that himself. His writing was too brilliant before, too logical, too well-reasoned. The person who wrote all of that can't possibly believe in this moment either. So, I suspect, that in order to get the ending that he wanted, he contrived the tipping point and then returned to his brilliant form to bring the story to its conclusion. One misstep is a harsh way to judge a truly exemplar book, but I believe that it was a key moment and it unravels all the true elements Orwell had so carefully set up before. Overall, however, it would be difficult to say to not read the book, because this type of writing and insight is difficult to come by. So if you are looking for a meaty intellectual treat, read it. But don't let him cheat you in the end. (less)

Like this review? yes (11 people liked it)

5 comments

08/16/07

Richard rated it:

bookshelves: general-reading

Read in July, 2007

About two days ago, I wrote an entry about Schrödinger's Cat (among other things) in which I argued that the people who do end up making especially prescient observations distinguish themselves in a way that we should allow people to be distinguished. No where is that statement more relevant than in discussing George Orwell's (the nom de plume of Eric Blair) prophetic dystopian vision of totalitarianism: 1984.

Though the year 1984 has come and gone (hell, I was still wipping around w...more About two days ago, I wrote an entry about Schrödinger's Cat (among other things) in which I argued that the people who do end up making especially prescient observations distinguish themselves in a way that we should allow people to be distinguished. No where is that statement more relevant than in discussing George Orwell's (the nom de plume of Eric Blair) prophetic dystopian vision of totalitarianism: 1984.

Though the year 1984 has come and gone (hell, I was still wipping around with my little tail somewhere inside my pops in '84), Orwell's demonic vision of a world without history, without truth, without any notion of physical reality remains as poignant and haunting now as it must have been when it was first published in 1949. In fact, in many ways, reading this book for the first time cover-to-cover (I had previously read excerpts), I am truly shocked that it was published so early on. Though many aspects of the novel are either ostensibly or clearly based on Stalinist Russia (particularly notable are the similarities between Big Brother and Stalin, and Goldstein and Trotsky), the work remains general enough that readers of any era—any political persuasion—might notice parallels to their own respective societies.

Certainly, our own does not escape indictment. I think one of the most poignant and thought-provoking aspects of this novel was the discussion in third chapter of the book (War is Peace) of perpetual war as a mechanism for retaining power and perpetuating domestic oppression; without doubt, no study of the Cold War would be complete without this consideration, nor, cynics would argue, would any study of the early 21st century.

All in all, 1984 easily remains one of the most important and influential novels of the past century, and I think in many ways, one of the few truly timeless works of literature. The issues Orwell wrote about in 1949 are only likely to grow more relevant as technology continues to advance at its breakneck pace. The greatest folly for us, as modern readers, would be to relegate this phenomenally prescient work as yet another Cold War classic, another case study in Stalinist barbarity; one need only pick up a newspaper today to realize the slippery slope to totalitarianism is one human society will likely navigate for as long as it is in existence.

Overall, 5 stars of 5. If you have never read this book, or perhaps, read it when you were younger, I encourage you to pick it up again. Without doubt, I was able to gain more perspective having read it as an adult than when I first read excerpts as a high school student.(less)

Like this review? yes (8 people liked it)

add a comment

08/12/07

John rated it:

Read in January, 2005

recommends it for: Classics readers, political readers concerned with overreaches

1984 is not a particularly good novel, but it is a very good essay. On the novel front, the characters are bland and you only care about them because of the awful things they live through. As a novel all the political exposition is heavyhanded, and the message completely overrides any sense of storytelling. As an essay, the points it makes can be earthshaking. It seems everyone who has so much as gotten a parking ticket thinks he lives in a 1984-dystopia. Every administration that reaches for po...more

Like this review? yes (10 people liked it)

1 comment

02/29/08

Anna rated it:

This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it, click here.

Quotes: (I know there’s a lot of them, but trust me I had more)
"And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed—if all records told the same tale—then the lie passed into history and became truth. 'Who controls the past' ran the Party slogan, 'controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.'"

"If the Party could thrust its hand into the past and say this or that even, it never happened—that, surely, was more terrifying than mer...more Quotes: (I know there’s a lot of them, but trust me I had more)
"And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed—if all records told the same tale—then the lie passed into history and became truth. 'Who controls the past' ran the Party slogan, 'controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.'"

"If the Party could thrust its hand into the past and say this or that even, it never happened—that, surely, was more terrifying than mere torture and death."

“In fact, there will be no thought, as we understand it now. Orthodoxy means not thinking—not needing to think. Orthodoxy is unconsciousness."

"It was like swimming against a current that swept you backwards however hard you struggled, and then suddenly deciding to turn round and go with the current instead of opposing it. Nothing had changed except your own attitude; the predestined thing happened in any case."

“He fell asleep murmuring ‘sanity is not statistical,’ with the feeling that this remark contained in it a profound wisdom.”

“In our society, those who have the best knowledge of what is happening are also those who are the furthest from seeing the world as it is. In general, the greater the understanding, the greater the delusion: the more intelligent, the less sane.”

Summary:
Nineteen Eighty-Four by George Orwell follows the life of Winston Smith a member of the totalitarian state of London in 1984. The Party, lead by Big Brother, controls and sees all through the power of thought police and telescreens. Winston is discontented with his present sate of being; he suspects something is quite wrong with the party. So he buys a diary and starts to write down his thoughtcrimes. He believes that a secret brotherhood exists who plan to overthrow the party, though this is only legendary. Winston works in the Ministry of Truth, which purpose is to create lies. Winston’s job is to correct inaccuracies of the past, to fit with the party’s present need. One day at work a girl named Julia passes him a note reading “I love you.” And so begins their long secret love affair, meets in secret and immaculate plans to not get caught. Eventually they find a room where they can meet more often. After a while O’Brien contacts Winston and fulfills his suspicion that O’Brien is actually part of the brotherhood. Both Julie and Winston go to O’Brien’s house to become full fledged members of this secret society. They read a book about the party, the war and the slogans: "War is Peace; Freedom is Slavery; Ignorance is Strength." However the thoughtpoilice catch up to them in their secret room, and they are brought to the Ministry of Love. O’Brian was not actually part of the brotherhood, but instead worked for the Ministry of Love. Julia and Winston are separated and Winston is put through months of torture and brainwash to ‘cure’ him from his disloyalty to the party. After a while Winston is brought to room 101 where O’Brian puts a cage full of rats on Winston’s head and threatens to open the cage door. Winston finally recants and tells O’Brian to “do it to Juila” that is what O’Brian needed. Winston is released to the outside world, he meets Julia again but nothing is there. In the end Winston is successfully brainwashed, he accepts and adheres to the Party, and he loves Big Brother.

Review:
I really enjoyed reading this book. I found it very well written and easily readable. I like the point of view of the author, it was very useful and unique, and at times I felt that I was the telescreen or a secret mike listening in on Winston’s life. I thought the author did a great job with the characters and their progression through the novel. I found all of the authors themes of power, language (as meaning of thought control) and the past controlling the present relevant and well-thought out. Possibly the single thing I didn’t like was the ending. Some part of me thought that in some way Winston was going to be able to come out of this unharmed. I didn’t want to believe that the protagonist could lose after fighting so hard. And I was pretty crushed when I read that last line “He loved Big brother.” I think the book needed that kind of ending, but I wish that there was a way for it to end better. This book deserve every single one of the five stars that i gave it, and i recommend this book. And hopefully 2+2 will never equal 5!
(less)

Like this review? yes (6 people liked it)

2 comments

08/23/07

Jason rated it:

Read in January, 2006

Any book or movie that has created a cultural point of reference is worth a look, by my estimation anyway.

For those of you who've heard the phrase "Orwellian" and never knew what it means, this book is a good place to start.

Before there was "The Matrix", "V for Vendetta", or virtually any other dreary view of a totalitarian future, there was 1984, George Orwell's bleak vision of a world under the thumb of a brutal, oppressive regime.
...more

Like this review? yes (6 people liked it)

add a comment

06/21/08

theduckthief rated it:

The Good: Written in 1949, this book is George Orwell's imagining of a dystopian future where Big Brother is the ultimate control freak. Those in power, the Innner Party, control the actions in their own ranks and those of the the Outer Party who could also be termed, the Middle Class.

The world has split into three super governments. Oceania, Eurasia and Eastasia with a constant war brewing between one or the other. This book take place in Oceania and concerns one Winston Smith. We ...more The Good: Written in 1949, this book is George Orwell's imagining of a dystopian future where Big Brother is the ultimate control freak. Those in power, the Innner Party, control the actions in their own ranks and those of the the Outer Party who could also be termed, the Middle Class.

The world has split into three super governments. Oceania, Eurasia and Eastasia with a constant war brewing between one or the other. This book take place in Oceania and concerns one Winston Smith. We watch as he suffers through a life where a telescreen (read creepy camera surveillance) watches his every move and monitors his heartbeat and facial expressions for anything that could indicate he might be a dissident.

People disappear every day in his life and everything in his life is regulated. The Inner Party is even writing dictionaries to limit and dictate what people can talk about. Every subsequent dictionary is smaller, with fewer words because the party believes that by controlling words they can control thought. After all, if you never heard the word 'lemon' would you ever know what it was?

What I liked was how accessible this book was even after almost 60 years. While some parts seemed quite archaic I found the piece quite modern and easy to read. The only place I was a little put off was the sentence "Winston's entrails seemed to grow cold." There was just something about that line that didn't work for me.

The Bad: The story moved along at a quick pace and then immediately bogged down when Winston started reading "the book". Whether Orwell started to suffer from soapbox hysteria, spouting his own ideals and morals from his book, I don't know. What I do know is the story started to drag and I got bored with all the technical gobbledegook that didn't move the plot along.

The Ugly: Orwell completely lost me at the end. It was as if the story had unraveled and he tried to glue and tape together what he could.

When I reached part three I assumed the story would pick up again and quickly come to a conclusion. Things just got more confusing though, especially where O'Brien was concerned. And Winston's transition at the end felt as if it was skimmed over. The very ending was a little surreal as well, though I don't know if it was meant to be.

The sad thing is that I really got into this book. I completely devoured it and in the end I was disappointed. I would almost recommend reading up to the point where Winston receives the book and then stop.(less)

Like this review? yes (4 people liked it)

add a comment

03/06/08

Derrick rated it:

Read in March, 2008

What a scary book. This is another one that seemingly everyone else read in highschool but somehow I managed not to. My favorite quote: "Orthodoxy means not thinking-not needing to think. Orthodoxy is unconsciousness."
For me this book put a whole new spin on relativism, both moral and philosophical. The past doesn't actually exist in any concrete way, all that exists is evidence (i.e. the effects the present time has on the physical world that lasts into the future) and memory;...more

Like this review? yes (4 people liked it)

1 comment

08/04/07

Melody rated it:

bookshelves: sci-fi-fantasy

Read in August, 2007

1984, George Orwell

Ok – so I’m probably the only one in the universe who didn’t read this in high school. This is a book that must be read, right? I knew the general premise of the book, big brother is watching you. But oh, how frightening it was! Big Brother was not only watching but he knew what you were thinking and when you were having sex and if you were having sex you better not be enjoying it; you better be just doing it to have a child. A child that would be traine...more 1984, George Orwell

Ok – so I’m probably the only one in the universe who didn’t read this in high school. This is a book that must be read, right? I knew the general premise of the book, big brother is watching you. But oh, how frightening it was! Big Brother was not only watching but he knew what you were thinking and when you were having sex and if you were having sex you better not be enjoying it; you better be just doing it to have a child. A child that would be trained to turn you in to the party if you did anything that was out of line. And who the hell could know what was in line or out of line? Anyway – the story is about Winston, who is evidently the only human left who remembers stuff and thinks for himself. He takes his ration of nasty tasting gin each day and dutifully rewrites history in the Ministry of Truth so that things that the party wants to be so, can not be proven not to be so. And when he knew where his wife was he had sex with his wife each night, for the good of the party. But, (can you believe it) he’s not happy. He feels something is missing and he holds on to the hope that there are others who feel the same way. He sees little flickers in people’s eyes that he seems to think mean that they are in this secret organization called the Brotherhood who have plans to overthrow Big Brother and – god only knows what their plan is – but just something different than what they have.

Winston is shocked when a woman (Julia) that he is sure is a party spy – a member of the thought police – and who he has fantasies of bashing her head in because he hates her so much – comes up to him and hands him a slip of paper that says that she loves him. Turns out that she just wants to have sex – but hey! So they carry on in a secret little room in the Prol’s area of town knowing that one day they’ll be shot. And all they are doing at this point is taking little naps with each other and getting their freak on. But then they decide to take a chance and approach this inner party member (O’Brian, who they are just sure is a traitor to big brother because Winston has seen that little flicker) to say that they’d be willing to throw acid in the face of a child if that’s what the brotherhood wanted them to do in order to overthrow big brother. But remember how Winston misjudged Julia? He thought she was stalking him because she wanted to turn him in to the thought police and she really just wanted sex? Let’s just say that Winston misjudged O’Brian too.

And then we get into the torturing and the 2 plus 2 makes 5 or I’ll turn this dial up to 100 and room 101 and then we finally get to the rats!!!! Which I just can’t go into. But that is the tipping point for ol’ Winston and it is just a matter of time before he is back out in the world loving Big Brother. And my god if it’s not just the scariest book in the world!
(less)

Like this review? yes (4 people liked it)

2 comments

06/23/07

Nora rated it:

(review of isbn 0451519841)

bookshelves: readshelf

Read in November, 2006

recommends it for: everyone

I cannot count the number of times I was asked, "What's so special about the book 1984?" That question scared me, because this novel is so important. Beyond that, I was floored that some people had not at least heard of "1984" (which was first published in 1949). That is not a criticism of those who are guilty of this, but rather an indication of my incredulity, because the impact had on our culture by Orwell's genius, manifested in "1984", cannot be overstated.
...more

Like this review? yes (4 people liked it)

1 comment

05/29/07

Sammy rated it:

bookshelves: the-good

Read in January, 2007

I really don't feel I have the right to judge or criticize such a lasting, timeless book with such a strong message. But then again, I don't care so I'll do it. This book I feel is more relevant now than it ever has been before, though Orwell was writing it at a time to bring to light the dangers of "communism" and more specifically totalitarianism and facism. But right now, with the state of chaos and fear the world is in right now (especially America) I feel this book has an even str...more I really don't feel I have the right to judge or criticize such a lasting, timeless book with such a strong message. But then again, I don't care so I'll do it. This book I feel is more relevant now than it ever has been before, though Orwell was writing it at a time to bring to light the dangers of "communism" and more specifically totalitarianism and facism. But right now, with the state of chaos and fear the world is in right now (especially America) I feel this book has an even stronger message.

Let me point out the bad points (I found) of this book. At times it became a little too wordy and political for my taste. So much so where I began to get a little lost. And, now that I think about it, that's really the only downside I found to the book. Though, some may find the ending disappointing (I'm definitely not going to spoil it) I found it just hammering Orwell's message even further, that it takes a long time to make change, but that it has to start somewhere.

I think the thing I found most fascinating about this book, and what drew me to it in the first place, was the idea of Newspeak and the whole principal it was founded on. The fact that it's a language that gets smaller as it develops instead of bigger. To me, words are amazing, I love them. I love that you can look up the word "good" in a thesaurus and find a plethora of synonyms to it. It's why I often refuse to dumb myself down to talk to other people who may not know the words I'm using. This book illustrates how restricted and sheltered people become when cut off from certain aspects of language. You begin to realize how precious a single word can be. There are words out there to describe every single thing you are feeling, what you want to do, who you are. If those are taken away, can you still feel this, do you know what you want to do, are you still truly you? Or are you just another nameless face in a crowd?

There are so many other amazing issues this book brings up and I would love to highlight them all, but definitely pick this book up. I think it's one of those books everyone should chance, you know? It ends up being a worthwhile read, if not a little tedious at times.(less)

Like this review? yes (4 people liked it)

2 comments

08/14/08

Choupette rated it:

bookshelves: 1001-books, classics, dystopias-utopias, own-or-access, to-review

Read in January, 2007

recommends it for: people who were around when Communism was still scary in the West

I recently had a discussion with Manny about why I don't like this book very much, so this would be the fruits:

For the record, I don't dislike either Animal Farm or 1984, I just don't like them nearly as much as everyone else seems to, and so I was deeply disappointed. But my liking or disliking of them makes no difference to how important they are to literature and to many people, and I like to think I appreciate that importance.

I suspect it could have a lot to do with ...more I recently had a discussion with Manny about why I don't like this book very much, so this would be the fruits:

For the record, I don't dislike either Animal Farm or 1984, I just don't like them nearly as much as everyone else seems to, and so I was deeply disappointed. But my liking or disliking of them makes no difference to how important they are to literature and to many people, and I like to think I appreciate that importance.

I suspect it could have a lot to do with the fact that Orwell came at the end of a fairly long dystopia-binge and that I have a huge love-hate thing happening with dystopias anyway. Nonetheless, the hate for 1984 was in greater proportion to the love than with any of the others.

I also suspect (nay, I know) that I have a leftist bent and that I am therefore much more inclined to be sympathetic to Communism and so forth, for all that I am fully aware of its drawbacks. And I have just emerged from a very intensive study of the Russian and Chinese revolutions, so the over-simplification of events and concepts in Animal Farm actually offended me. I guess I just feel like it's unfair to focus so heavily on the bad aspects of Communism and completely ignore everything that is good about it or has the potential to be good about it.

I don't think they are well written, language-wise. The prose is as strictly functional as every aspect of the regime they are trying to criticise! It's not simple or unpretentious, it's unsophisticated and clunky. Camus is simple or unpretentious. Orwell just can't write. It's like a bizarre, twisted, reversed form of propaganda.

But the more I think, the more I am convinced it is simply the lack of originality in 1984's format that makes me dislike it. Orwell himself admitted that he was heavily inspired by Yevgeny Zamyatin's We, and reading Orwell just felt like a rehash of Zamyatin. Concepts like newspeak and doublethink are interesting and important, but I wish Orwell had chosen a form of expression that didn't make me feel like I was reading someone else's work. How hard can it be to write a traditional dystopia? Milan Kundera wrote a much more convincing, lyrical, beautiful and above all original criticism of totalitarianism in The Incredible Lightness of Being. (Yes, it's a love story too, but there are a few passages that summed up Communism so perfectly that there didn't seem to be any need to look elsewhere.)

And in the end, Manny and I agreed that it is probably the date of my birth that makes the difference. I was born just days after the Berlin Wall fell; I have never known a world in which Communism has seemed a threat. The western world, at least, has learned that Communism will never work, and I believe that lesson will stay learnt until many years after my death. Possibly I am young and naive, but only time will tell. So basically I'm the n'importe quoi generation brat who doesn't realise how much her forebears suffered. Some things are universal. But I maintain that 1984 is unoriginal and not very well written, and maybe I'm more willing to admit it because the historical context doesn't mean so much to me.(less)

Like this review? yes (3 people liked it)

15 comments

12/15/07

Michal rated it:

Read in December, 2007

I have found my experience with the canon of important books to be uncomfortably lacking, and recently decided to mend that. This was the first on my list.
Well, now I know what everybody was talking about. That's good. As far as reading experience goes, though, I wasn't really engrossed at all. The ideas of the novel, while promising, were never thoroughly explored, and it didn't have the virtue of interesting characters to make the reader care much about the ideas.
Basically, the n...more I have found my experience with the canon of important books to be uncomfortably lacking, and recently decided to mend that. This was the first on my list.
Well, now I know what everybody was talking about. That's good. As far as reading experience goes, though, I wasn't really engrossed at all. The ideas of the novel, while promising, were never thoroughly explored, and it didn't have the virtue of interesting characters to make the reader care much about the ideas.
Basically, the novel portrays a world where everything is controlled by the Party, everything is seen by the Party, and everything comes from the Party. The slightest twinge of disagreement or disobedience to the party is punishable by death. The ones who keep living live by keeping their mental eyes willingly shut (or perhaps more accurately, willingly glazed over). History is constantly edited by the Party, and once the changes are done, there is no evidence but human memory left to contradict the new records. Orwell spins a world that says that the strength of mental conviction isn't enough in the face of overwhelming numbers. Eventually, all that a person holds dear can be turned on its head, and the opposite is willingly accepted with voluntary blindness.
As far as I know, it's impossible for me to totally ignore the truth when I'm deceiving myself (how would I know if it was possible to completely deceive myself? hmmmm... nope, still don't believe it, even through the irony). This kind of mentality wouldn't happen over a large area; certainly not globally. The system both controlling the information and the punishment for disobedience would have to be far more sophisticated than any police force in history to convince people to willingly deceive themselves, and so far, that's never happened. I don't see it ever happening, especially not with the internet in place.
The most interesting idea to me that this book presented was never pursued. At one point fairly early in the plot, the point is briefly made that fervent depravity is more virtuous than any morality imposed by the brainwashing Party. The idea of voluntary virtue is never even touched on. Those three separate angles would have made an interesting tension, but it wasn't explored.
Perhaps my opinion of this book will shift in time, but at this moment (approximately an hour and a half after finishing the thing), I don't see that it told me anything valuable other than the explanation of what exactly people are referring to with Big Brother, and the necessity of keeping my space free from spying devices.(less)

Like this review? yes (3 people liked it)

3 comments

09/09/07

Jenny rated it:

bookshelves: classics, england_1900s, fantasy__and_sci-fi

Read in September, 2007

recommends it for: people interested in politics

It's a bit cliche and tacky to write an intricate review of a book almost everyone has read, but Orwell's most famous book (or perhaps second most-famous, after "Animal Farm") left a distinct political impression with me, and the best way to make sense of it is to write about it:

What seems to me as a central theme of "1984" is the concept of liberty, with special reference to how it has been addressed in the various political ideologies in history. With respect to...more It's a bit cliche and tacky to write an intricate review of a book almost everyone has read, but Orwell's most famous book (or perhaps second most-famous, after "Animal Farm") left a distinct political impression with me, and the best way to make sense of it is to write about it:

What seems to me as a central theme of "1984" is the concept of liberty, with special reference to how it has been addressed in the various political ideologies in history. With respect to the book, the concept is largely literal - the loss of "liberty" with regard to where you work, where you live, what you eat, what you wear and with whom you associate. But beyond the literal "unfreedoms," as they would be called in Newspeak, hide the more terrifying, less tangible losses of liberty: the freedom to think and believe as an individual wishes, and without persecution. Looking back to the Inquisition, the uncertain era of the English King Henry VIII or even the American Revolution, civilization has always fought with the sentiment of wanting to liberate itself in some way, or of some thing. And although perhaps Orwell writes about it differently, I think one can argue that the Party in "1984" is no exception; it is fighting for liberation from usurpers to its "throne" of unrestricted power. In order to do this, as Winston learns, it is necessary to retard the entire nation's intelligence.

Stay with me here - let's apply this Orwellian concept to, say, the war in Iraq. We're fighting for liberation (supposedly from terrorism, but more likely in actuality from subservience to the Middle East in the oil industry - but that's a different essay), the Sunnis and Shiites are fighting for liberation (from us as much as from each other, I expect), and, as in "1984," the war is a continual waste of supplies and production, which in effect retards the American citizens' intelligence by squandering money that ought to be spent on our own country on a war that in reality has nothing to do with us, except that we started it for no good reason. Aside from keeping the nation dumb as to the state of affairs in Iraq, or what the war is doing to the economy at home (not to mention killing thousands of our troops), the U.S. government is, in its anti-terrorism movement, tending toward Big Brother-type surveillance with such pieces of legislation as the Patriot Act. I know this is kind of rambling, but my point here is this: Big Brother is watching, but his name is George W. Bush, and this is 2007, not "1984."

Just a little reflection on a book... didn't mean it to be political! ;)(less)

Like this review? yes (3 people liked it)

2 comments

10/10/08

Colin McKay Miller rated it:

(review of isbn 0881030368)

Read in March, 2000

1984 has the greatest ending to a book ever.

Long before Big Brother was a floating disconnected term more closely tied with reality TV, George Orwell made the ultimate dystopian statement: Big Brother is watching you. With a social commentary still relevant today—even if the year isn’t—1984 (written in 1947-48 when Orwell had a severe case of tuberculosis) centers in on Winston Smith, a mundane man working at the Ministry of Truth rewriting historical documents. There are several...more

Like this review? yes (2 people liked it)

1 comment

08/02/08

LonewolfMX rated it:

Read in December, 2006

recommended to LonewolfMX by: My Brother
recommends it for: Anybody who cares about the politics of the world

Read this book almost a year and a half. It is a chilling one Winston Smith who lives in Air Strip 1 (Formally London)in the super state of Oceania which encompasses the former UK, North and South America, Australia and the southern part of Africa.

In this dictatorship which is ruled by the INGSOC Party (English Socialism) which is led by the enigmatic leader simply known as Big Brother who lead the glorious revolution to overthrow the old world order and create a new society for "...more Read this book almost a year and a half. It is a chilling one Winston Smith who lives in Air Strip 1 (Formally London)in the super state of Oceania which encompasses the former UK, North and South America, Australia and the southern part of Africa.

In this dictatorship which is ruled by the INGSOC Party (English Socialism) which is led by the enigmatic leader simply known as Big Brother who lead the glorious revolution to overthrow the old world order and create a new society for "the people" The nation of Oceania is in a constant never ending war with two other superstates such Eur-Asia,which encopasses the European continent, and Russia, and East-Asia, rules all China, Japan, the Korean peninsula, and part of the Middle East.

Mapof the World of 1984:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e3/1984_fictious_world_map_v2_quad.svg

In this society people are always constantly monitored by the Telescreens interactive television sets that pipe in an endless stream of political propaganda as monitor the people of Oceania which are divided into 3 classes at the top is the all powerful and all knowing Big Brother next are his most loyal followers such as O' Brien who befriends Winston that reaps most of the benefits Big Brother has to offer them for their loyalty they are known as the Inner Party who are identifiable by their black overalls (I imagine it's like the Mao suit of Communist China), The Outer Party who mostly wear blue overalls constitute about 13% of the population the Outer Party represents the middle class in Oceanic society, bureaucrats who do most of the actual work in the Party government and its four ministries.

Which are known as the Ministry of Peace, which conducts the never ending war against the 2 rival superstates known in Newspeak Minipax,The Ministry of Plenty is responsible for providing the populace of Oceania with consumer and domestic goods such as food, clothes, and misc the Ministry of Plenty or Miniplenty claims they have exceeded their production roles, while in fact it is the opposite and Oceania like the former Soviet Union is always faced rationing and product shortages, The Ministry of Truth or Minitrue is the propaganda that controls the information and mass media news, entertainment, education, and the fine arts. Winston Smith works for the Records Department (RecDep) of Minitrue, "rectifying" historical records and newspaper articles to make them conform to Big Brother's most recent pronouncements, thus making everything that the Party says true. Finally the dreaded Ministry of Love or Minilove, who are the secret police responsible for the identification, monitoring, arrest and torture of dissidents, real or imagined, which was enforced by the Thought Police.

Finally at the bottom of the class hierarchy's is the Proles who form 85% of the population and the Party does not care for their well being and treats uses them to exploit their labor and keep them distracted with media and entertainment that was far beyond the reach of the party members which was known as the Prolefeed which had the responsibility keeping the the Proles under control.

I liked the novel, but I found it bit depressing I can imagine living in such a world, many people would dismiss this story as fiction, but ironically throughout history there have been Totalitarian societies such as Stalin's Soviet Union, Nazi Germany under Hitler, Communist China under Mao's and the country that has a real life 1984 system is Kim Jong Ill's North Korea. (less)

Like this review? yes (2 people liked it)

add a comment

02/14/08

Mark rated it:

bookshelves: political, sf

Read in January, 1980

"It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking thirteen."

Wow. I read this book a long time ago so I knew what was going to happen, but still...wow. Orwell envisioned a dystopian future and followed his vision with unblinking eye to the bitter end.

"Oceania is at war with Eastasia. Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia."

In most ways this book has not come true. North Korea is the only country I know that strongly ...more

Like this review? yes (2 people liked it)

2 comments

07/25/07

Christina rated it:

(review of isbn 0452284236)

Here's something I wrote in 2003, sort of about the experience of reading this book.

- - - - - - - - - -

i remember, in eighth grade, reading 1984. i stayed up way past my bedtime, of course (this was the insurrection of my day-- and when i heard vague stirrings of my wrathful mother in the other room i'd quick reach up and turn out the light, waiting rigidly with wide eyes in the darkness, hoping she wouldn't be tipped off on her way to the bathroom by my bedsprings' sudde...more

Like this review? yes (2 people liked it)

1 comment

09/11/07

Tosh rated it:

It's interesting, right now I am in London, and I think about this book a lot. Due to the fact that there are cameras everywhere in the Capital. Also a lot of signs saying in nature that 'you are being photographed for your own safety.'

It doesn't set me off on london, but it's a city that is for sure in love with security. also there are notices to always beware, to be alert, and don't hesitate to turn in any information if you see anything strange, etc.

And a lot of ...more

Like this review? yes (2 people liked it)

7 comments

« previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 … 8423 8424 next »

polls

Run off poll:
What frequently challenged or banned CLASSIC book should we read in July?

(We will select two books but you can read either, both or none of course.)

Slaughterhouse-Five by Kurt Vonnegut

19 votes, 28.8%

Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov

31 votes, 47.0%

1984 by George Orwell

16 votes, 24.2%

66 total votes

7 comments Sign in to vote!

More...

recent status updates | recommend it | blog it

combine
other editions (181)

More editions...

quotes from this book

"Now I will tell you the answer to my question. It is this. The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power, pure power. What pure power means you will understand presently. We are different from the oligarchies of the past in that we know what we are doing. All the others, even those who resembled ourselves, were cowards and hypocrites. The German Nazis and the Russian Communists came very close to us in their methods, but they never had the courage to recognize their own motives. They pretended, perhaps they even believed, that they had seized power unwillingly and for a limited time, and that just around the corner there lay a paradise where human beings would be free and equal. We are not like that. We know what no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means; it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now you begin to understand me." More quotes...