1984: George Orwell's road to dystopia

**hazz** · 10-02-2013, 12:20 AM

1984: George Orwell's road to dystopia
David Aaronovitch, BBC

A decade of political chaos shaped George Orwell's vision of a totalitarian future, writes David Aaronovitch.

I was brought up in a house full of books, none of them by George Orwell.

Simone de Beauvoir was there, as was Sartre and Aldous Huxley and even Lenin. The last is actually a clue as to the absence of the first.

My parents were Communists. To them Orwell was on the other side of politics - someone whose principal writings were hostile to them and what they wanted to achieve.

This suspicious animosity had lasted beyond the death of Orwell and the demise of Stalin, and into the period when British Communists, by and large, now held the same view of the Soviet Union under Uncle Joe that Orwell had held and that had motivated him to write both Animal Farm and Nineteen Eighty-Four.

Their problem was, I now think, made acute by the way in which these two great books - and Nineteen Eighty-Four in particular - had become major weapons in the ideological war between left and right.

This use of Nineteen Eighty-Four, and its contradiction to Orwell's own long-stated support for some kind of socialism, needed explaining.

How had it come about that the targets in Nineteen Eighty-Four were English socialists and their nightmare totalitarian state? After all, Orwell was in charge of naming his own inventions and could have easily decided on names and characteristics that were friendlier to the political tendencies that he claimed to favour.

For years the question of Orwell's intentions in Nineteen Eighty-Four has caused great debate.

With a few exceptions on the far left, every political tendency has wanted to claim him. So there has been a well-established and heartfelt desire on the more moderate left to claim that Orwell was indeed a genuine socialist whose warning was aimed at totalitarianism in general, not at the left per se.

The right, of course, have had the easier task of suggesting that Orwell was writing about what he appeared to be writing about. It seems to me that the right probably has the better argument.

Nineteen Eighty-Four was published in 1949, but Orwell was first set on the road to it at least 12 years earlier when he was fighting Franco's insurgents in Spain as a member of a left-wing, but non-Stalinist militia, the Workers' Party of Marxist Unification (POUM).

Orwell had gone to Spain to fight Francoist fascism, but found himself face-to-face with another form of totalitarianism. The pro-Stalin communist forces in Spain turned on the POUM, branding them Trotskyist traitors.

Back home no one wanted to know about his experiences. Even non-communist left-wingers, including the publisher Victor Gollancz and the New Statesman editor Kingsley Martin, were reluctant to publish his accounts of what had happened, for fear of harming the overall cause of anti-fascism.
Spanish civil war Orwell's experiences were shaped by fighting in the Spanish civil war

Orwell's opposition to totalitarianism, of left and right alike, was toughened up by his association with the novelist Arthur Koestler, a communist who had been imprisoned under threat of execution by the fascists in Spain.

Koestler later escaped to England where he published his novel, Darkness at Noon, in 1940.

This bleak story of an old Bolshevik who confesses to crimes he has not committed and is shot by the Soviet authorities, was to have a profound influence on Orwell.

His many book reviews also reveal much about his political influences, but one name, James Burnham, stands out.

An ex-communist, Burnham's 1941 book, The Managerial Revolution, filled Orwell with both horror and fascination.

In the book, he found two of the crucial elements of his novel: a world ruled by three super-states, and the idea that the overlords of the future would not be demagogues or democrats, but managers and bureaucrats.

Two events were to bring Burnham's dark prophecy to some kind of fruition. First, in 1943, at the Tehran Conference, Marshal Stalin, President Roosevelt and Prime Minister Churchill met to discuss the world after the war.
Atomic bomb blast Nineteen Eighty-Four is set in the aftermath of a nuclear war

Orwell saw the beginnings of a Burnham-style carve-up of the globe into superpowers and told friends that this was what initially set him going on the novel.

Less than two years later, the Americans dropped atom bombs on Japan. In an essay for Tribune magazine called You and the Atomic Bomb, Orwell argued that the A-Bomb threatened to bring into being Burnham's world of super states governed by totalitarian hierarchies of managers.

It's often missed that Nineteen Eighty-Four is set a few decades after an atomic war. The managers administering the book's three super states, Oceania, Eurasia and Eastasia, have tacitly agreed not to try to destroy each other but to continue forever in a kind of cold war.

Indeed, it was Orwell who coined the phrase "cold war" in that 1945 essay.

In his view of things, totalitarianism was not merely a theoretical threat from a fictional future. The urgency of Nineteen Eighty-Four, and of much of Orwell's wartime and post-war writing, springs clearly from his sense that totalitarianism was already proving dangerously attractive to many on the left, not least intellectuals..

But what I think we can see is that, with fascist totalitarianism utterly defeated in WWII, Orwell found himself one of the relatively few people prepared to agitate against the left-totalitarianism of our erstwhile ally, the Soviet Union.

When Animal Farm was published, and when Nineteen Eighty-Four was being conceptualised and then written, Orwell's overwhelming preoccupation was to warn against Stalinism and its onward march.

We may speculate what Orwell might have thought had he lived to see Stalin dead, Joe McCarthy in his pomp, to have witnessed the Khrushchev speech denouncing Stalin to the 20th Party Congress in 1956, decolonisation, or a succession of Conservative governments led by men like Eden, whom Orwell appeared to despise.

Perhaps a new book would have been written to give succour to the real socialists of the world.

And maybe my parents would have allowed that one on to their shelves, somewhere between Alex Comfort and Virginia Woolf.

BBC Radio 4's George Orwell Season

**mao say dung** · 10-02-2013, 01:16 AM

Ah, yes. Orwell the neocon. Not really a socialist at all.

Norman Podhoretz wrote this at greater length back in January of 1983. I was a longtime subscriber to Harpers and read it 5 times when the issue got to my room. We and many people in North America argued the article on and off for years.

IngSoc, eh? Why would he call Big Brother's party a socialist party?

England, a great nation. In 1984 a socialist nation.

Perhaps a National Socialist nation?

The right-wing crapahola that insists that Socialism equals Totalitarianism is just that-- crap. As is the Republican-radical right mantra that socialism and fascism are the same thing.

Aaronovitch once tweeted that whatever Russian spies had stolen was less than a thousandth as damaging as Wikileaks.

**hazz** · 10-02-2013, 01:33 AM

Originally Posted by mao say dung

I was a longtime subscriber to Harpers and read it 5 times when the issue got to my room.

If you are still suffering from OCD, I believe there are drugs which can help.

You wouldn't have been that american chap we had selling socialist worker outside Sheffield university's student union in the mid 80's. I only ask to see if I have come across two hard left americans in my life rather than just the one.

**Troy** · 10-02-2013, 02:43 AM

I never really thought of the book in terms of Socialism and Fascism but more of how people can succumb to Totalitarianism in times of war and the way a permanent war state can allow manipulation without question.

There are many times when I can relate parts of the book with Thailand....

**Butterfly** · 10-02-2013, 03:39 AM

^ that's how it should be read, but also the right/left angle can't be dismissed because that's exactly how the right played it in reality, not the fiction

**Latindancer** · 10-02-2013, 04:58 AM

There are some challenging issues here. I wonder at what point does a socialist nanny state start to become totalitarian ? The current government in Australia is becoming rather too controlling....

**Boon Mee** · 10-02-2013, 05:32 AM

Not everything Orwell wrote focused on fascism/anti communism.

His "Burmese Days" is an excellent read on this area and John Co. for whom he did work at the time.

**Rural Surin** · 10-02-2013, 07:40 PM

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Not everything Orwell wrote focused on fascism/anti communism.

His "Burmese Days" is an excellent read on this area and John Co. for whom he did work at the time.

Good point, Booners.
A great deal of Orwell's work tends to be less politically driven, outside of what has been pegged upon himself.

He made a living as a "journalist" and correspondent for years.
His article and commentary [journals, magazines, serials, newspapers] archive is extraordinarily deep for his time.

Unfortunately, as the masses see him and his legacy - through a small window. A few well-promoted tomes, not popular at the time of their writing, of course. His "fame" came decades later......fashionable to hold Orwell in awe and iconic reference.

**mao say dung** · 10-02-2013, 07:53 PM

Originally Posted by Rural Surin

A great deal of Orwell's work tends to be less politically driven, outside of what has been pegged upon himself.

I admit it's been years since I read his complete essays, and most of the "novels", but I have the impression he was primarily a "political" writer, espousing classic left-wing causes while simultaneously criticising the left for the failings that made it unlikely that socialism would ever appeal to "the workers".

He, like so much of the left then and now, was an upper-middle class type who was never really comfortable with the poor, just as he was an imperial administrator who wasn't comfortable with imperialism. As much as I admired a lot of his work, I never imagined I'd like to spend time with him at all.

So, Jeff, maybe you could illustrate your point about his "legacy" being seen through a small window.

**GooMaiRoo** · 12-02-2013, 12:35 PM

Except for modern-day North Korea, George Orwell's 1984 didn't really turn out to be very accurate. The totalitarianism of modern technology is much more subtle and effective than Orwell's police state. Kurt Vonnegut's Player Piano (written only 4 years later in 1952) has turned out to be far more prophetic. In Player Piano, the majority of people are functionally useless, an illiterate mob robbed of any dignity or meaningful livelihood because of an economy run by machines and a technocratic elite. Some of economist Paul Krugman's recent writings and interviews on inequality and technology seem very consistent with Vonnegut's vision. You get an idea of how brilliant Vonnegut was when 60 years after his novel was written we have a Nobel prize-winning economist Paul Krugman discussing the issue:

Paul Krugman: Rise Of Machines Partially To Blame For Income Inequality (VIDEO)

**Mr Earl** · 12-02-2013, 01:51 PM

Orwell's first novel Down and out in London and Paris is also good and a poignant social commentary which isn't overtly political. I been meaning to reread it if I can find a kindle.version.

**mao say dung** · 12-02-2013, 01:57 PM

^^Yes, if you compare the two classic dystopian works, Nineteen Eighty-four and Brave New World, Orwell's book has maintained a cultural resonance in spite of its absolute failure as prophecy, where Huxley's book has practically disappeared even though it is a much more accurate portrait of the kind of totalitarianism we've ended up with (if that is what we've ended up with).

Maybe having to listen to someone chant "a gram is better than a damn" every time you pop a Prozac or a Xanax would be a lot more annoying than having to hear "Big Brother" every time a conspiracy theory gets unloaded on us yet again.

**mao say dung** · 15-02-2013, 06:54 PM

Originally Posted by GooMaiRoo

Kurt Vonnegut's Player Piano (written only 4 years later in 1952) has turned out to be far more prophetic.

Thanks for this! I just reread this and have to agree, it's far closer to an accurate prophecy even if it is a little more dated by its very obvious "50s America" setting.

Gonna read a few more Vonneguts now... haven't bothered with him since the mid-70s.

**Rural Surin** · 16-02-2013, 08:30 AM

Originally Posted by Mr Earl

Orwell's first novel Down and out in London and Paris is also good and a poignant social commentary which isn't overtly political. I been meaning to reread it if I can find a kindle.version.

Wonder if old George could appreciate the world of kindle?
Probably not.

**Tom Sawyer** · 17-02-2013, 11:35 PM

We all know what's coming in the next 50 years. And many living now (yes maybe me too) should have have taken up arms to offset it for the benefit of all. I'd be willing to do something other than that in a significant way (so funny as you know the mini-mouse-type micro-IQ recruiters approach, anyway.. they are so comical)

**Rural Surin** · 17-02-2013, 11:48 PM

Originally Posted by Tom Sawyer

We all know what's coming in the next 50 years. And many living now (yes maybe me too) should have have taken up arms to offset it for the benefit of all. I'd be willing to do something other than that in a significant way (so funny as you know the mini-mouse-type micro-IQ recruiters approach, anyway.. they are so comical)

I was always under the impression that "it" was already in full-force, yes?
The greater population just aren't aware of it yet...nor connected so.
They are very good at at slight-of-hand and manipulation, and we're not terribly cognitive as the controllers ply their techniques amongst the percentage.

To literally take up arms would be would be what they would want and expect.
Fits like a glove and would justify any continuing suppressive activity.

To resist in a manner that would befit and certainly confuse them....would be to not participate within their manufactured system.
The old Gandhi philosophies...BE THE CHANGE. LIVE YOUR PROTEST.

Most have become comfortable with the ideals to go along to get along - at any risks and dispositions. Even amongst the more enlightened - we're trapped.

With no escape.

**blue** · 18-02-2013, 12:06 AM

Originally Posted by mao say dung

having to hear "Big Brother" every time a conspiracy theory gets unloaded on us yet again.

But you don't hear it , in fact young people just think of the TV contestant game show ;
perhaps thats the conspiracy , neuter the saying and make having cameras watching you 24 /7 fun rather than intrusive .

**Rural Surin** · 18-02-2013, 12:14 AM

Originally Posted by blue

Originally Posted by mao say dung

having to hear "Big Brother" every time a conspiracy theory gets unloaded on us yet again.

But you don't hear it , in fact young people just think of the TV contestant game show ;
perhaps thats the conspiracy , neuter the saying and make having cameras watching you 24 /7 fun rather than intrusive .

Certainly doesn't apply exclusively to the younger generations, Blue.

It's quite apparnt the older crowd are just as numb.....comfortably, of course.

**Tom Sawyer** · 18-02-2013, 09:45 AM

Originally Posted by blue

Originally Posted by mao say dung

having to hear "Big Brother" every time a conspiracy theory gets unloaded on us yet again.

But you don't hear it , in fact young people just think of the TV contestant game show ;
perhaps thats the conspiracy , neuter the saying and make having cameras watching you 24 /7 fun rather than intrusive .

Good post. Quite possibly the case..

**billy the kid** · 19-02-2013, 07:49 PM

thought it was 'Animal Farm' that put Orwell on the reader's map.
anyway.

.

**Norton** · 19-02-2013, 08:01 PM

Originally Posted by Troy

how people can succumb to Totalitarianism in times of war and the way a permanent war state can allow manipulation without question.

Originally Posted by Troy

There are many times when I can relate parts of the book with Thailand....

I look westward to find near perfect examples of folks succumbing to Totalitarianism via manipulation by their governments. Thailand hardly rates a mention.

**Tom Sawyer** · 20-02-2013, 12:41 PM

Originally Posted by hazz

[...] with fascist totalitarianism utterly defeated in WWII, [...]

It wasn't utterly defeated at all. First, Spain's Franco was in full control of that country, having defeated the socialists some 6 years earlier. Second, Hitler wasn't a "fascist" - he was a maniacal dictator of an aggressively co-aligned nationalist socialist party big on central planning and keen on expansion by all means. Get it straight BBC.

**wasabi** · 21-02-2013, 05:42 AM

Amazing,over on , BBC radio 4 they have over the past fortnight have run a fresh BBC out look on the Spanish civil war. God knows what has happened in the BBC,the usual patter is running stories of wonderful Brit's who went to fight for the Socialists in Spain against the nasty evil Facists. Brit's on the good side,always.
"Homage to Catalonia" by George Orwell was broadcast. WHAT,the Socialists are shown to be what they are,hateful,ruthless with the infighting,murderous and paranoid.

**Tom Sawyer** · 21-02-2013, 11:30 PM

The socialists, the majority, were thwarted by the UK and every other western country in the League of Nations. The League imposed a non-intervention order on all members. A monitoring mission was set up to ensure no one broke the blockade. Of course that didn't stop Hitler who sent aircraft bombing missions to help Franco. That was the kiss of death for the people fighting against the wealthy land owners and Franco's shit-scum. Franco should be dug up and his bones pissed upon then given to a dog.

**Troy** · 22-02-2013, 04:41 PM

Originally Posted by Norton

Originally Posted by Troy

how people can succumb to Totalitarianism in times of war and the way a permanent war state can allow manipulation without question.

Originally Posted by Troy

There are many times when I can relate parts of the book with Thailand....

I look westward to find near perfect examples of folks succumbing to Totalitarianism via manipulation by their governments. Thailand hardly rates a mention.

Relating parts of the book with Thailand does not mean I haven't seen examples elsewhere in the world, just not mentioned since this is a Thailand-centric forum.

However, in terms of Proles and keeping them under control, the Thai ruling class have managed it rather well.

Thread: 1984: George Orwell's road to dystopia

Thread Tools

Display

1984: George Orwell's road to dystopia

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

Posting Permissions