1984 in Never too Late to Read Classics

Jun 08, 2018 Douglas Beagley rated it liked it

Classic advice to writers: "Show don't tell."

In Orwell's astonishing, powerful classic, the "tell" is used too much, and it becomes repetitive. Arguments that are important to the author, such as the erasure of the past, get explained and then re-explained with very little variation. Not enough is actually shown through story or character. The book becomes a sermon, not a story. I loved the well-executed, brilliantly dreary and poignant scenes... but the philosophizing pontifications, no matter Classic advice to writers: "Show don't tell."

In Orwell's astonishing, powerful classic, the "tell" is used too much, and it becomes repetitive. Arguments that are important to the author, such as the erasure of the past, get explained and then re-explained with very little variation. Not enough is actually shown through story or character. The book becomes a sermon, not a story. I loved the well-executed, brilliantly dreary and poignant scenes... but the philosophizing pontifications, no matter how well done at times, cause the "novel" format to fall apart.

Quick example--we read several paragraphs of philosophizing that are then briefly interrupted by, "Winston reached down to scratch at his varicose ulcer". When an author has to do that, it appears as if they are pushing in a detail just to make sure we remember we are reading a novel and not a religious tract. It's not effective. There are powerful, moody scenes in this book that do indeed support the philosophy, but the ratio is off.

What I love most about Part I of 1984 is that the character himself, the would-be revolutionary against Big Brother and the society as a whole he lives in, is very early on revealed to actually be Big Brother. This is not done as a metaphor or in philosophy. Instead, we observe Winston simply *being* Big Brother. He is the thing he hates. He chooses it every day, while blaming everyone else around him, from the party elites (suppressors) to the proles (it's up to them to rise up, why aren't they!?). He claims to hate Big Brother, but his occupation, the work he enjoys the most each day, is core-level "Big Brothering."

This reversal, which I did not know about ahead of reading the book, is revealed through action--through early, actual scenes in the story, and not through explanation. That makes it more powerful than all the material covered in lecture. The first person narrator is mostly unaware of his foundational hypocrisy. He thinks it is only surface-level practicality--this successfully echoes a problem facing all of modern civilization in the real world. I love that this theme is reinforced in tiny ways--his lying about his razors, the embodiment of doublethink in his thoughts, his reflexive bow to inevitability, and so forth.

A landmark work of its kind, 1984 sets out to make a series of observations and arguments more than to tell a story. That's not my kind of book, but I can still appreciate it. 1984 says powerful things not just about communism or related political frameworks, but about any society that we live in while railing against: We all support and sustain our culture.

In Part II of 1984, we shift into a more story-driven mode for a while. I love that Winston particularly wants his paramour to be immoral, dirty, vile, etc., in order to contradict the false cleanliness and morality espoused by his culture. I also particularly loved the short argument between them about fatalism and death-- Winston is preoccupied by the concept that all of life is death, since their capture and torture is inevitable to him, whereas she is still able to snuggle up to him and say, "What about right now? Right now is working pretty great, isn't it?" This is a very nicely done illustration of a huge problem for humanity.

Unfortunately, the run of well-realized scenes is soon interrupted by Winston reading a book. A book which is an extended sci-fi lecture, laying out what is wrong with the world, as the text builds the world. Full on lecture mode, page after page of Orwell's worries. When we finally climb out of this, we are rewarded with a beautiful, majestic moment (observing the wash-woman) that says much less, but is 10x more powerful. It feels like Orwell doesn't know what he's actually good at it. He thinks he is good at explaining ideas-- he isn't. He's a great novelist, and only a "pretty good" writer of philosophy.

Part III ends the book with evocative torture and a culminating lecture from an unnecessary antagonist-- well done, I guess, but just not my kind of book.

Lots to love in here, but I will not read it again. I recommend reading 1984 to everyone in order to understand references and cultural analysis, etc. etc., like you might read a textbook for school. I don't recommend it for just "reading a novel." ...more

Like · see review

Jul 05, 2007 Scott rated it liked it

Shelves: fiction

Anyone who has heard the reference of "Big Brother" has to read this book. This is also a good book for thinking about how government intervenes in people's lives. Classic ...more

Like · see review