Karin’s Comments (group member since Jan 15, 2015)

Karin’s comments from the On Paths Unknown group.

Traveller wrote: "Darnit, don't tell me I'm wading through all of that alone!

You guys better give me a medal or sumfin'."

Hehe Thanks for taking a hit for the team by wading through it ;) Yesterday was the Superbowl, and I'm off to work now, but I plan to comment later today. I must say, I'm feeling slightly disillusioned with 1984 as we near the end. I don't hate it--I just don't love it as much as I thought I would.

Haha! Ruth, that made me laugh. Yes; I admit I skimmed through that part quite rapidly as well! Maybe Julia's on to something ;)

Traveller wrote: "I'm not sure if this is part of the callousness that others had been talking about, but -that- I find too much. I would not do that. Not for anything or anybody, unless it was to save the entire w..."

My kids are all crying so I better go, but I thought it was definitely appalling that Winston agreed so readily to do such horrible things. Winston and Julia have never really cared too much about other peoples' lives.

I wonder if they really understand the consequences of such horrific actions? Winston is so eager to believe O'Brian, it's almost pathetic. And Winsotn is so careless! I would have thought that Julia would have been a little more aware of Party tricks and ask Winston, what proof do you have that O'Brian is trustworthy?

I did find it notable that it was Julia who spoke up first that they would not be willing to separate. It seemed that Winston almost said "yes."

What did you guys think about the paperweight?

And no rush at all to start the Part 3 thread :)

Traveller wrote: "I must admit though, that one area in which i had found We a lot more feminist, shall we say, is that there the protagonist's love-object had been a real rebel; a real instigator of revolution, and..."

I really need to read WE. I'm going to put it on my reading list.

Yes, Julia can be confusing. It seems as if everyone in Winston's immediate world demonstrates a type of social-political schizophrenia, believing one thing and acting another. I think what is consistent about Julia is her pragmatism. For example, when the prole woman's singing reminds Winston of the bird he saw on the first day he and Julia met, he Julia that the bird was singing for them. However, Julia replies that the bird was just singing, nothing more.

I did find it troubling that she fell asleep when Winston tried to read her O'Brian's book, as if Julia is Winston's ally in preserving a bit of humanity against the Party, but not intellectually.

Ruth wrote: "Traveller wrote: "Oh! I had completely forgotten that i had wanted to post this bit:

In some ways she was far more acute than Winston, and far less susceptible to Party propaganda. Once when he h..."

Yes, I think Orwell must have hinted at it previously. I think in Chapter 3, Winston claims the Party invented airplanes, even though he thinks he remembers airplanes before the Party. And Winston's entire job is about forging the past, so I think you're right, Orwell was planting little seeds all a long that the bominbgs--and that Goldstein and the Brotherhood are all fabrications.

Traveller wrote: "Karin wrote: "Haha! Yeah, that was a little surprising. Julia is embracing her "feminine" side. Orwell does seem to idealize the the "feminine." This was especially evident when Winston remembered ..."

Yes, I see what you mean! That part had me gritting my teeth as well! Ack!

Traveller wrote: "Okay, now it's really starting to go down the drain for me with the cosmetics she applied to her face.
Argh...

What the..??/ a real woman’s frock???????

Nononononono *cry*
I’ll wear silk stoc..."

Haha! Yeah, that was a little surprising. Julia is embracing her "feminine" side. Orwell does seem to idealize the the "feminine." This was especially evident when Winston remembered the protective gesture of his mother and when he suddenly found the child-bearing prole outside his window as beautiful. Orwell sees the "mother-figure" in a positive, but not necessarily feminist light (does that make sense?). But while idealizing women is nice, it can also be a form on condemnation. But I'm still not sure I would label Orwell a misogynist... I'm waiting until the end of the book.

For now, O'Brian seems to be monologuing a bit too much in Room 101, you know when a character explains everything at the end?

Traveller wrote: "Karin wrote: "Just a quick question before I'm off to work:

Traveller's comment about Dworkin made me think: why is visiting a prostitute and looking at porn not a crime in 1984, but Julia's and W..."

Yes, you're right, Traveller. Thanks! I guess the government thinks that the proles would have no reason to revolt if they have all the porn, sex, drugs, and mindless entertainment they want. Yes, I will also have to finish the book before I have a complete picture :)

Just a quick question before I'm off to work:

Traveller's comment about Dworkin made me think: why is visiting a prostitute and looking at porn not a crime in 1984, but Julia's and Winston's affair is?

Ruth wrote: "I wasn't defending or arguing against, just that the phrase is still in use.

Though,...I have to say I am not comfortable with all the cameras, and never have been. When I first heard about the s..."

Ruth, I've never been too comfortable with all the cameras either. I think a loss of privacy is also a loss of security. Interesting statistics!

Traveller wrote: "... but in the meantime, I do want to mention that I find both Winston and Julia shockingly callous when they discuss his pushing Katherine over the cliff.

Regarding the condemnation of female sex..."

Thanks for the links to Dworkin and Irigaray. I'm not as familiar with them as I should be. I think Dworkin was against pornography? And that she wore overalls :)

Would she disagree that sex could be a political weapon? Or that it helps Winston feel a sense of humanity?

Oh, sorry for all the italics in my previous post. I usually type on my phone (which doesn't allow me to press "reply"), so I guess I'm still figuring out how to reply to a post on my computer :)

Traveller wrote: "... but in the meantime, I do want to mention that I find both Winston and Julia shockingly callous when they discuss his pushing Katherine over the cliff.

That was pretty disturbing, wasn't it? Another example of Julia's rather shocking slight regard for other people occurs when Winston was telling her about Jones, Aaronson, and Rutherford, and she says: "Then what was there to worry about? People are being killed off all the time, aren't they?"

While Julia reawakens a sense of hope and love in Winston, I can definitely see that she is a little selfish and short-sighted. For example, Winston muses to himself after her shocking remark about Katherine that Julia did not understand that "pushing an inconvenient person over the cliff solves nothing." I think Winston, even in his stunted emotional state, is more aware of long-term consequences than Julia is.

Still, even though she is shockingly callous at times, Julia awakens a sense of humanity in Winston. Here is a pretty hopeful passage in an otherwise depressing book that I think symbolizes their relationship: "[the bird] spread out its wing, fitted them carefully into place again, ducked its head for a moment, as though making a sort of obeisance to the sun, and then began to pour forth a torrent of song."

Traveller mentioned earlier in the thread that there seems to be some erotic undertones in the book between Winston and O'Brian. I completely agree. I wonder if by heightening Winston's ability to love and respond to his desires, Julia ironically made Winston more open to trust O'Brian?

Wow, great find, Ruth! Thanks for posting!

Derek (Guilty of thoughtcrime) wrote: "Oh... don't fear everybody with a mustache! Mustaches are good... trust me."

Well, you seem pretty nice, so if you have a mustache, then I guess they aren't exclusively a sign of megalomania :)

Traveller wrote: "Derek (Guilty of thoughtcrime) wrote: "Following up to my point about the Party members being emotionally stunted and sometimes acting like five-year-olds in Part I, this is actually where I starte..."

I also find Julia fascinating. Like Traveller, I don't think Orwell sees her as "dirty" or "slutty." She is more dynamic, in control, interesting, and confident than Winston. I may be completely off base here, but I was reminded of the book Lady Chatterley's Lover, where sex was a way to maintain human dignity and individuality in a de-humanizing society. Winston's love/lust of Julia is probably the only authentic feeling he has felt in a long time.

I'm behind in the reading, so I'll see if I still think this later on :)

Poingu wrote: people still come out of them writing their poetry, speaking their banned languages, loving their children, singing forbidden anthems, practicing religions that would have condemned them to death if discovered. I don't think that's naive hope, I think it's proven by history...even if I sound a little bit like Princess Leia."

Poingu, it seems like you're ready to move on, but could I linger for a minute on your fascinating point? I agree with you that totalitarian regimes often implode (East Berlin, Russia, China, stirrings in the Arab world--though North Korea seems to be surprisingly resilient). But I wonder if it would be safe to say that just the attempt to control people, whether in fascism, socialism, communism, capitalism is dangerous, and that's what Orwell was warning us about about? While the human spirit is resilient (the Jews were able to hold onto their culture even Hitler tried to destroy their culture and memory), the scars are there forever. Hopefully that makes sense :)

Traveller wrote: " just think of what people are prepared to believe when it comes from positions of authority - when people's parents, teachers or religion tells them something, or if they see it in print."

So true, Traveller! I think it's pretty obvious that Big Brother is a combination of Hitler and Stalin (the mustache!). What is interesting to me is how Big Brother is almost elevated to a god-like status. He never appears in person--he is a male, dominant figure who is always watching. Hitler wanted to do the same thing. He used myth, propaganda, art, and symbolism to elevate himself above the people, almost to a demi-god status. Almost like a pseudo-religion.

"But she's a prole—and Syme had said "The proles are not human beings". So Winston really can't be expected to give anything but a "dehumanizing description"."

I agree, but like Poingu, I do see some unsettling parts of Winston's character. I think once he imagined bashing in Julia's head with a rock, and then again he imagined bashing in a man's head in the cafeteria. There does seem to be a bit of callousness in his character. I don't think Orwell is going out of his was to make Winston into a traditional hero. Even physically, Winston isn't very compelling: "he's smallish" with a "frail figure" and has a varicose ulcer above his ankle.

"I think I'd agree that the mass's consciousness would be much less if their Bible had had only a thousand words. Maybe there'd never have been a Reformation..."

What an insightful comment that I think gets at the heart of the novel! Winston's first act of rebellion or "reformation" is writing in his diary. His diary represents such an interesting connection between language and free thought, language and memory, and books and life. It seemed as though he felt compelled to write, as if writing helped him feel human.