Comparing The Chrysalids 'And 1984'

The Imperfect Utopia of The Chrysalids and 1984

Many societies, whether fictional or non-fictional, aim to create a utopian society. However, what makes a utopian society? A utopia is defined as an ideal place or state, bearing systems of political and social perfection. The two societies in John Wyndham’s The Chrysalids and George Orwell’s 1984 attempt to create a utopia, but establish a very distorted version of a utopia. Both societies blindly conform to the principles of a keystone figure, manipulate events in order to better reflect the figure, and exterminate those who oppose the leader and stall the development of the ‘utopia’.

First off, both societies conform to the principle of the ruling figure without question – despite the presence

of inhumane conduct within the principles – thus laying the foundation for their distorted utopia. The Waknuk society within The Chrysalids has a very adamant belief in God “…Waknuk it had become; a… God-respecting community” (Wyndham 17) – this belief in God provides a base for Waknuk’s ‘utopia’, as all of society believe in one figure, as opposed to having varying beliefs. On the other hand, the society of 1984 places their faith in a political figure that goes by the name of ‘Big Brother’. The mention and appearance of Big Brother stir strong emotions within the community – “At this moment the entire group of people broke into a deep, slow, rhythmical chant of ‘B-B!...’ – over and over again… Partly it was a sort of hymn to the wisdom and majesty of Big Brother” (Orwell 18). This passage displays the society’s strong faith in Big Brother; similar to the Waknuk society; this society’s belief in one figure provides a strong foundation for political perfection. This widespread worship of each leader also leads to society believing all words supported by the authoritative figure, despite any contradictions that may arise within their principles. In The Chrysalids, people are eager to believe anything that supports God and his principles, even if “there’s a lot of nonsense mixed up in what they say about them” (Wyndham 78) – this goes to show that Waknuk will willingly believe anything that supports their faith. The same situation applies to the 1984 society, where the masses happily support anything done on Big Brother’s behalf; this is evident during a scenario when “there had… been demonstrations to thank Big Brother for raising the chocolate ration to twenty grammes a week. And only yesterday… it had been announced that the ration was to be reduced to twenty grammes a week. Was it possible that they could swallow that, after only twenty-four hours? Yes, they swallowed it” (Orwell 61-62). This shows that the 1984 society happily trusts anything that is ‘approved’ of Big Brother, despite contradictions in his statements (in this case: the chocolate ration being raised to 20 grammes when it had just been lowered to that amount). Society’s willingness to abide by the leader’s principles also results in a tainted moral compass. When the Waknuk community is presented with something that goes against God’s principles, they deal with it non-hesitatingly, even if inhumane methods are involved. This is shown when Joseph Strorm ‘disciplines’ his son David when he does something that goes against Waknuk beliefs (“‘I’ll deal with this [David concealing a Deviation]…’ To me he [Joseph Strorm] added: ‘Go to your room’. I set my jaw, and turned to go. My father followed, picking up a whip as he came” [Wyndham 51]). This passage implies that force is used to discipline David (hence the mention of the whip) – a father beating his child depicts Waknuk’s cruel ways – and shows that they will obey their leader without a doubt. Meanwhile, when the 1984 society is presented with films of war (that their nation is presumably winning), their reaction is described as such: “Audience much amused by shots of a huge fat man trying to swim away with a helicopter after him… then he was filled with holes [gunshots]… and he sank. Audience shouting with laughter when he sank.” (Orwell 10) – this quote also shows that the 1984 society takes joy in savage acts (similar to how the Waknuk society willingly partakes in cruel actions) and believes that these acts are ‘correct’, as long as they support their superior’s principles. The two societies’ similarities in believing in one leader, accepting their principles without hesitation, and their corrupted sense of right and wrong show that they are more than willing to be heavily influenced by their respective rulers.
The development of the corrupted utopias of The Chrysalids and 1984 continues when the higher-ups of both societies manipulate past and present events, so that they better reflect the ruler’s teachings.

This is shown through each society’s lack of understanding about their past – however, the little details that they know of reflect current fundamentals (or the formation of such), which may signal a change in historical records. In The Chrysalids, society firmly believes that the people of the past were allegedly wiped out by a phenomenon called ‘Tribulation’ (“…the wonderful world that the Old People lived in, as it had been before God sent Tribulation [Wyndham 5]). This passage shows that past events have been created by God, and has helped shape today’s society. A similar belief can be seen in 1984, where society’s foundation is credited to Big Brother (with no reference to events prior to society’s creation): “He tried to remember in what year he had first heard mention of Big Brother… it was impossible to be certain. In the Party histories, of course, Big Brother figured as the leader and guardian of the Revolution since its… earliest days.” (Orwell 38) – this is another example of history being altered by superiors (also known as the Party), as “[n]othing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right” (Orwell 162). However, in the event that something contradictory to common belief is found within society, other society members cover it up. In

The Chrysalids, Deviations (or faults) in society are dealt with accordingly – for example, David’s father “ceremonially slaughtered the two-headed calf, four-legged chicken, or whatever kind of Offence it happened to be” (Wyndham 19); the organisms mentioned in the passage all defied God’s principles, so they were all eliminated from society. A similar practice is performed in 1984; if the society discovered that some of Big Brother’s prophecies were ‘incorrect’, they would be changed immediately, and all copies of the flawed prophecy would be destroyed. This is shown when the book’s protagonist receives a note saying that “the reporting of Big Brother’s Order Of The Day… is extremely unsatisfactory and makes reference to non-existent persons. Rewrite in full.” (Orwell 47) – as soon as this change was made and “had been assembled and collated, that… would be reprinted, the original copy destroyed, and the corrected copy placed on the files in its stead” (Orwell 42). This shows the correction and eradication of flaws in the society. The societies’ modified histories and modification of its flaws are examples of biased manipulation, so that all events reflect the teachings of their respective leaders.
Despite each society’s attempts to destroy imperfections within their communities, there are still defectors that exist within each society; these defectors are exterminated as soon as they show signs of revolting, which ensure the continuation of the ‘utopia development’.

All potential threats to the utopia are recognized by each society. For example, the Waknuk society has a “sharp eye for the odd, or the unusual” (Wyndham 5) – an example of a person displaying these qualities is Joseph Strorm, who “was a careful… man with a keen eye for an Offence” (Wyndham 5); everyone in the society is always on the lookout for anything that goes against God’s word. In 1984, society’s citizens are watched by their version of Waknuk’s ‘keen eye’, the Thought Police. In this society, “there was… no way of knowing whether you were watched at any given moment. How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire” (Orwell 5) – meaning that all citizens are always watched for any action that goes against Big Brother’s ‘wisdom’. In the event that a defector is discovered, both societies have measures put in place to ensure that the defector is excluded from society. In The Chrysalids, society’s defectors (Deviations) are sent away to the Fringes, disowned from society, and put at a disadvantage. “The people of the Fringes… they were really Deviations… these people… had very little where they lived in their border country” (Wyndham 20). This passage implies that

the exiled Deviations do not have the same luxuries as those who conform to the beliefs of Waknuk; not only do they become excluded from society, they are left to fend for themselves, as their new lifestyle provides little comfort. However, in the world of 1984, people “were simply abolished, annihilated, vaporized was the right word.” (Orwell 21) – unlike the exiles in The Chrysalids, who still had a chance to live as society’s outcasts, 1984’s defectors were killed and erased from existence, as demonstrated by this passage: “…deleting from the press the names of people who have been vaporized and were therefore considered never to be existed” (Orwell 44) – so if one was found to have a mindset that opposed the general mindset of society, then they would be exterminated. Examples of eradicated members of society are Aunt Harriet from The Chrysalids and Syme from 1984. In The Chrysalids, Aunt Harriet goes against God’s teachings by speaking “heresy in my [Joseph Strorm’s] house”. In this society, speaking heresy is “not allowed to pass” (Wyndham 74) – thus marking Aunt Harriet as a rebel. Society deals with this blasphemy by (presumably) murdering Aunt Harriet; the day after the blasphemy takes place, her body is “found in the river” (Wyndham 74) – Aunt Harriet, who spoke out against God’s teachings, was killed because her unorthodox opinion went against those of the Waknuk community – thus stalling the progression of the ‘utopian’ society. While 1984’s Syme may not have spoken out against Big Brother, he is, however, “too intelligent. He sees too clearly. The Party does not like such people. One day he will disappear” (Orwell 56). Syme’s intelligence is seen as a threat towards the integrity of Big Brother; because of his intelligence, he is ‘vaporized’ from society: “Syme had vanished. A morning came, and he was missing from work… On the third day Winston went into… the Records Department to look at… a printed list of the members of the Chess Committee, of whom Syme had been one. It looked almost exactly as it had looked before… but it was one name shorter. It was enough. Syme had ceased to exist” (Orwell 154). Syme’s intelligence was perceived as dangerous within the 1984 society and also had the potential to stall the progression of the 1984 utopia, hence why he was killed. With the help of keen senses for the unusual, each society manages to eradicate anyone who opposes the general mindset of the community, thus ensuring that everyone possesses the same mindset and furthering the development of the ‘utopia’.
It is clear that the societies in The Chrysalids and 1984 are attempting to strive towards being a utopian society, however in doing so, create a very flawed society. Both societies show an unwavering willingness to conform to their leader’s principles, alter past and present events in order to reflect the principles, and eradicate those who oppose the greater power. While both societies may have good intentions in mind when attempting to create their idea of a perfect society, the end result of their work depicts otherwise and does not reflect an ideal society.