More handpicked essays just for you.
1984 as a political satire
Literary analysis of 1984 by George Orwell
Literary analysis of 1984 by George Orwell
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: 1984 as a political satire
lost
The storyteller encounters three conflicts, one with his job as a police man, And one with the British Empire on account of
its shameful control of Burma, And the last one with the Elaphant. In Each of the three conflict confuse his capacity to make objective, clear decision.
Particularly, Orwell starts his story with job his struggle. By saying "I was hated by a large number of people" (1). Also when "he
is tripped up on the football field and the crowd yelled with hideous laughter and the sneering yellow faces met him everywhere" (6-9). As
well as "the young Buddhist priests jeer at European people" (12). And "The dirty work and injustice of Empire make him feels guilty and try
to quit" (13-17)."The dirty work and injustice of Empire make him feels guilty and try to
…show more content…
Orwell said "
sooner I chucked up my job" (14). Absolutely that is a secret. He does not declare about that. Maybe because he is afraid of the Empire or
afraid of lostting his job.
Moreover, he faces the Empire. Orwell here was talking about Britain, European society and the imperialism and how it is
harmful and oppressive to all. So that was Orwell's purpose. Orwell has represented the British Raj. For example the Injustice and terrible
things of Empire by arrested persons in "the stinking cages". What is more, "the gray cowed faces or the scarred buttocks of the man who
had been flogged with bamboos" (16-19). Also do not let people to defend themselves when they faced with danger. Therefore he was the
only who one has a rifle. Orwell said, " All I knew was that I was stuck between my hatred of the empire I served and my rage against the evil
spirited little beasts who tried to make my job impossible"(24-25). And "the greatest joy in the world would be to drive a bayonet into
Throughout the section, the main character, Winston is constantly facing conflicts. Most of these conflicts are internal. In the society Winston lives in, he is being monitored 24/7, which prevents him from doing most things freely. The first sign of conflict is shown when he takes out the diary he bought, and starts writing things he remembers. Of course he is disobeying the law, but he is taking a risk. The “Two-minute hate” is literally a time where everyone hates on the traitors for two minutes. There, Winston faces some internal conflicts; they are internal because the other characters do not know what Winston is thinking. The girl with the dark hair is introduced. She is a bad impression to Winston, and he always feels uncomfortable around her. Later in the book, she intimidates him even more because it feels like she is watching him. Another character that Winston has an internal conflict is O’Brien. It is one of the most interesting encounters because it might have involved O’Brien himself. During the Two-minute Hate, their eyes meet together and Winston suddenly thinks that ...
middle of paper ... ... He loved “Big Brother” (Orwell 638). This chilling thought really drives home Orwell’s point that if we allow totalitarianism, it will overwhelm anyone and drive out any concept of free will. This world Orwell creates casts light on the psychological manipulation in totalitarian societies that leads to so many other infringements of human nature, such as the ability to think for oneself and form your own opinions.
The point Orwell is trying to get across is that this mistreatment of the working class is not tolerable and must be disbanded (121). His solution to the problem is Socialism. He wants to show that a Socialist society can be implemented globally and benefit especially the lower classes. The problem he faces is that Socialism is quickly being phased out of the conversation and being replaced by the likes of Fascism (171). He is convinced that a Socialist movement is inevitable and a “historic necessity” (172). One problem he addresses is the correlation in the minds of the people to Socialism and Communism (175). While Communism is about control over the people, states Socialism is about justice, liberty, and receiving better wages for fewer hours while having no one bossing you around (176). Orwell even goes to the extent of saying that Fascism is a product of Communism (187). The biggest point Orwell attempts to give in my opinion is that there is no way the ideals he seeks (mentioned before as justice, liberty, etc.) cannot be achieved without a Socialist movements he calls “progress” (214). The “progress” he speaks of includes the de-centralization of power in the class system and the progression of machines and other means
Howe, Tom. "George Orwell." British Writers Volume VII. Ed. Ian Scott-Kilvert. New York: Scribner, 1984. 273-287.
The book, 1984 by George Orwell, is about the external conflict between Winston Smith and Big Brother; and the internal conflict between the two ideas, democracy and totalitarianism. Orwell wrote the novel to show society what it could become if things kept getting worse: he sensed of the expansion of communism when he wrote the novel. The conflict between democracy and totalitarianism at the year of 1945 created two characters, Winston Smith and Big Brother, in orwell's mind. Big Brother is the embodiment of all the ideals of the totalitarian party. In contrast to Big Brother, Winston Smith keeps the idea of democracy emphasizes freedom, he has to hide his own thought because the Big Brother's party will punish him by death if the party finds it out. George orwell criticizes of Big Brother's society by describing it as a dark and a gloomy place. It warns that people might believe that everyone must become slaves to the government in order to have an orderly society, but at the expense of the freedom of the people.
In 1922, Orwell began working as the assistant superintendent of police in Myaungmya, Burma, and this is where his hatred toward imperialism and its tyrannical rule over the underdogs in society developed. He felt guilty torturing and flogging unwilling subjects. The community had taken too much power over the individual, and the imperialist society commanded Orwell to enforce this injustice: “I was stuck between my hatred of the empire I served and my rage against the evil-spirited little beasts who tried to make my job impossible. With one part of my mind I thought of the British Raj as an unbreakable tyranny…with another part I thought the greatest joy in the world would be to drive a bayonet into a Buddhist priest’s guts. Feelings like these are normal by-products of imperialism” (qtd. in Lewis 41). Obviously, imperialism had affected Orwell to the point where he developed animosity towards the Burmese. As a policeman doing “the dirty work of the Empire” (qtd. in Lewis 41), Orwell acquired a hatred for imperialism, a belief that is focused on dominion over other individuals.
It is difficult for them to hope to succeed in an area where so many of them have failed. The constant theme of betrayal in 1984 is being used by George Orwell to show how hopeless Winston’s struggle against the Totalitarian system is, giving the reader an idea of how bad this type of government is. The reader is introduced to this dark time and given hope in the form of the rebellious protagonist, Winston. However, the reader soon realises how hopelessly alone Winston is in his silent battle when they see that the government is against him, he has no support or allies, and that even his own mind can be turned against him. The message is clear and makes readers who live in a democracy happier with what they have.
According to Orwell his freedom was destroyed when he took on the role of the tyrant. His job was that of a sub-divisional police officer in Lower Burma. A crisis arose in which he was faced with a hard decision to make. An elephant had gone on a rampage in the village and had destroyed countless huts and killed a man. When Orwell came upon the elephant it was clear to him that it had calmed down and that the elephant would cause no more harm to anyone. Orwell was faced with a decision: he could either shoot the beast or wait until his master came to get him. However, this decision was made much more complicated. Orwell was surrounded by two thousand Burmans who, as Orwell said, “were watching me as they would watch a conjurer about to perform a magic trick.” Although the Burmans were all underneath him and subject to him, he was very concerned about what they thought he should do. He was so concerned in fact he concluded that he had to do as they wished of him.
During Orwell's time in India he is exposed to several unethical situations. As an imperial officer, Orwell is often harassed, "I was an obvious target and was baited whenever it seemed safe"(Orwell 521). Therefore, Orwell's initial feelings are fear and rage toward the Burmese. He displays his hate in wanting " to drive a bayonet into the Buddhist priest's guts"(522). However, thou...
The author of the novel 1984 utilizes the element of conflict to portray the evils of psychological manipulation amongst characters. Throughout the novel, the author George Orwell uses the conflicts between The Party and the people which this particular variety of government controls. An example of this would be the external conflict between Big Brother and Winston because he likes to express himself in his diary and have human interaction. However, for people in this society this is not possible since, “Big Brother is watching you” (Orwell 3) constantly. Despite the fact that expression is not allowed it is only human nature to have an interest towards those topics, creating Winston’s grievances with The Party. The constant overviewing from
And he debates that the end of the Cold War is “an ideal context for a reassessment of Orwell 's political ideas” (Newsinger ix). Newsinger gives us a map of Orwell 's intellectual terrain, and deftly orientates the reader around the key Orwellian debates which run around the idea of war and revolution against inequality and dictatorship. He examines how Orwell 's politics developed in a changing world. Newsinger 's argument is that, although Orwell 's politics shifted throughout his lifetime, the one constant was his unwavering socialism. What detractors - and even some admirers - have missed is that he never ceased to write from within the left, attacking the betrayal of the revolution rather than the revolution
He describes, “I was only an absurd puppet pushed to and fro” (60). He is dealing with the internal conflicts of who he should align with: himself, the British, or the Burmese. If he were to acknowledge his beliefs and align with himself, he could be the start of an uprise. Surely, others would follow. He even confirms his “thought of the British Raj as an unbreakable tyranny” and says, “Ask any Anglo-Indian official, if you catch him off duty,” referring to the hatred of the English empire (58). By expressing his dislike for the British, Orwell is finally attempting to stand up for his beliefs. The fact that his character is unable to execute his beliefs, though, highlights him trying to not look foolish in the presence of others. Clearly, he is in an unbearable circle of self-deprecation and doubt. By the end of the narrative, Orwell’s character regrets his decision to shoot the elephant. This ultimately represents Orwell’s uncertainty as he goes through life. He, like all of us, is struggling to predict which path is the best for him to go down as he ventures through his existence. Because of this, his actions for shooting the elephant are justified. He is just trying to accomplish all that he can while simultaneously dealing with his own questions of identity. This allows Orwell to be seen as a humble individual who is just trying
George Orwell uses setting, characterization and symbols to show that true power come from following the dictates of one’s conscience. The state of power established through the imperialistic backdrop show that Orwell should have control over the Burmese. Also, the perspective and ideas given by Orwell show his true character and lessens the overall power set up for him. Lastly, the symbols Orwell uses show representation of traditional forms of power, but take on different implications in the story. These points come together to prove that power exists within one’s self and not through one’s position, conquests or by the items they possess. In the end, it can be said that man’s journey for power will be a continuous struggle until the end of time but that in order at attain power, one must learn to listen to one’s conscience.
Based on the two essays, George Orwell is a vivid writer who uses a unique point of view and strong themes of pride and role playing to convey his messages. His writings are easy to pick out because of the strengths of these messages. Just like politicians in government, people with power turn corrupt to stay in power and keep their reputations. Anyone who takes on power must be prepared to live with the consequences of his actions. Orwell knows this challenge well and conveys this principle in his writing. After all, his narration is based on real life experiences and not fictional fantasies.
Texts can provide a vast knowledge on subjects dependent on content, whereas novels are often seen as being purely for leisure and enjoyment. However, it can often be seen that prose consists of a wide array of factors that relate to historical events and can be used to inform and express feelings towards a topic. George Orwell stated that he would often write “because there is some lie that I want to expose” (Orwell, Why I write, 1946) and indicated this through his novels. Orwell’s characterisation connects the reader emotionally to the characters through simplistic descriptions which draw upon sympathy when labelled as “feeble” (Orwell, Animal Farm, 1945). Alongside this simplistic style, Orwell’s matter-of-face tone reflects the characters inability to respond to events and depicts the severity of the outcome.