|
|
On Orwell's 1984 and Common Sense
| Article
# : |
11241 |
|
|
Section : |
BOOK WORLD
|
| Issue
Date : |
5 / 1986 |
5,477 Words |
| Author
: |
Dennis G. Stevens
|
Orwell is not a philosopher and 1984 is not a philosophic work. However, Orwell forces us to consider philosophic issues by arguing that modern tyranny is caused not by technology but by something more fundamental: the comprehensive rejection of the idea of nature. The emancipation of technology described in 1984 is sensible only if a decision has been made that nature is devoid of meaning. The terrible tyranny of Oceania is successful because it embodies an idea which in fact its subjects accept, that there is no objective reality or nature which should be respected. Orwell warns his readers that this idea, which is so widespread in modern times, is the true source of modern tyranny. In other words, Orwell reminds us of a very basic point: our ideas have political consequences. Once the idea of nature has been rejected, it is impossible to defend freedom over slavery. It makes perfect sense to love Big Brother if there is no external standard of nature by which he can be judged. Orwell's 1984 is a plea for sanity in a world which seems to be losing its grip on reality. He asks us to cling to the commonsense notion that good and bad, right and wrong, noble and base are real. Oceania is nothing more than the political manifestation of their denial. This study of 1984 will explore Orwell's argument about the cause of modern tyranny and the alternative which he offers us. It common sense sufficient as a bulwark against the ideas which foster modern tyranny? In order to approach these issues, three topics must be analyzed: first, the significance of time in 1984; second, Orwell's view of human nature; and third, the effect which the rejection of nature has on language.
The Significance of Time
The fundamental characteristic of the ruling party in Oceania is its control of time, as is evident from the party slogan: "Who controls the past controls the future: who controls the present controls the past." (32,204) This slogan is the embodiment of an idea which is a threat to the very existence of politics and human nature itself. The party stands for the enforcement of transience through the absolute control of the past. "The mutability of the past is the central tenet of Ingsoc [English Socialism]." (176) Winston Smith, the main character in 1984, has the job of rewriting history in what is called the Ministry of Truth. But Orwell suggests that embracing transience is tantamount to abandoning any possibility of establishing standards of truth and falsehood. "Everything faded into mist. The past was erased, the erasure was forgotten, the lie became truth." (64) One can only make a distinction between truth and falsehood by looking beyond the moment; if nature establishes no standards of truth which are eternal, then what is right can only be determined by force. O'Brien, Winston's inquisitor, says: "do you realize that the past, starting from yesterday, has actually been abolished? History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right." (128)
The abolition of the past is the rejection of eternity, and this results in complete groundlessness. Orwell's primary focus in 1984 is this problem of groundlessness; Oceania is the logical extension of the rejection of eternity. In other words, 1984 is an inquiry into an idea more than it is an account of tyranny. In an essay of his, Orwell says that "to be corrupted by totalitarianism one does not have to live in a totalitarian country. The mere prevalence of certain ideas can spread a kind of poison…" Modernity presents us with ideas which are essentially tyrannic, and one has an obligation to
...
Read Full Article
|
|
