by Austin Gautreaux
Of all the supplemental texts that were assigned this semester, 1984, by George Orwell was the title I was looking forward to the least. I have a particular uneasiness when reading it, one that has lingered over the years ever since my first attempt to read it many years ago. The text is a fascinating deconstruction of the principles of totalitarian control and Governmental overreach to consolidate and maintain power. The control of day-to-day life caused by the direct, assumed, surveillance of the populace, reinforced by a complex peer-based information network is as chilling as it is prophetically aware. It may be a safe assumption to say that the omnipotent entity “Big Brother” is as synonymous with Government Surveillance, as “Orwellian” is with totalitarian dystopia. Yet the most haunting aspect of the entire novel is an ever-looming sense of isolation. Few texts have ever made me feel the haunting, bone creeping dread of feeling so overwhelmingly alone. That nothing I say or do has meaning, that in the larger picture of the world I have no contribution to be made. This is exactly how “Big Brother” maintains control and manipulates its populace and society into strict allegiance with Party principles. By isolating everyone, “Big Brother” can create an omnipresent force that seeps through the day-to-day life of each person, to the point where even the “home,” a bastion of privacy, is not exempt from the watchful eyes of a leader who may very well not exist. Sleep, neighbors, even thoughts become traitorous aspects that will deter individuals away from the sanctity of “Big Brother.” For it is in this isolation that the only saving grace, the only respite is to swear fealty to the image of “Big Brother” and to sacrifice individuality for the glory of that “god like” institution. We see this not only through attempts to control communication, thoughts, and actions, but also a direct comparison near the end of the novel when the torture-lead Winston is finally broken and accepts the comfort of the ever-present supervisor, O’Brien, and by extension “Big Brother.”
Every morning begins the same. The telescreen blares a command to awaken, then from a tired state the “Physical Jerks” begin. Each tenant in the building conducts their morning stretches under the strict gaze of an unseen entity. Once the jerks are completed, the same sorry, raggedy blue overalls are put on and the day has truly begun. The same foggy air of London is all that can be seen in the sky above and all that stares in front is the ever-looming visage of “Big Brother” posters littering the streets, always watching, always vigilant. The worn-down path leads to the Ministry of Truth, where rations are distributed for breakfast. The same cubicle awaits the daily assignments, where you’re convinced your coworker across the way is assigned the same task. Lunch finally rolls along before the daily 2-minutes hate begins. As the boos grow in tempo, the angry cries turn to full blown howls of rage, and the small sniffles blur into full screeches of pain, sorrow, and rage. You look around silently, piecing together your thoughts and finding some sort of feeling of displacement. You took some time before to write your thoughts down in a journal, unsure of the point or if anything will ever come of it. Finally, as the day ends you come to an old pawn shop and look around, finding some value in the old nick knacks and pieces of the past. However ultimately you return home to begin the same routine all over again, alone, always alone.
Many often point to the surveillance aspect of “Big Brother” when discussing 1984. It seems to be by and large the greatest aspect of Government overreach, yet there are far more nefarious means of control presented in the text that deserve to be examined and scrutinized. Of any direct action taken to control the populace, it is the ability to turn an individual against oneself and their neighbors, to isolate their very being into a state of assumed surveillance in order to control them even without direct oversight: “You had to live — did live, from habit that became instinct – in the assumption that every sound you made was overheard, and, except in darkness, every movement scrutinized” (3). There is no need to monitor a populace when the populace will monitor itself. It is the threat of the watchful eyes of unseen entities keeping tabs on a person that sparks the uncertainty, that uncertainty turns to paranoia and becomes an exploitable aspect of everyday life that will ultimately undermine the privacy and sanctity of one”’s thoughts breaking them on a personal level and forcing compliance into a party that will in turn dictate all necessary thoughts and actions for that person. It’s the relinquishment of control and total acceptance of party doctrine that spells the end of an individual. An egregious divulgement of personal thought and action that will result in the ideal citizen. This is not only accomplished through the use of assumed surveillance but through the use of neighbors, a constant threat of being reported by those around us can destroy any claim to personal attachment and trust. We can see this dynamic clearly play out when near the finale of 1984, Mr. Pearson has also been arrested by the “Thought Police.” His very own daughter had spied on him through a keyhole and identified treacherous thoughts ultimately sentencing her father, her own flesh and blood, to the rehabilitation of “Big Brother.”
My intention in focusing on these ideas of betrayal, fear, and isolation is not to attack personal feelings and attachments as weaknesses but rather as tools used in the conquest of individuality in service to the continued prosperity of a political force. Perhaps, the best way to frame this particular state of living within “Big Brother” comes from the supplied documentary when discussing worker attitudes of the Burmese Police force; “Were trapped in a conspiracy of silence or the cowardice of acquiescence” (Two Winston’s, Documentary) When fear is utilized as a means of oppression, and isolation used as a tool for compliance, the very nature of individuality becomes diminutive and all but obsolete. The removal of these characteristics is the true nature of “Big Brother” and ultimately the form of power that allows the party to continue to exist; “Power is in tearing human minds to pieces and putting them together again in new shapes of your own choosing.” (1984, pg. 266). The essence of control in this situation is the controlling of an individual through the mind. To create an environment in which the world, the people, and even one’s own thoughts have become nothing more than viscous, untrustworthy, and completely isolated, however it is at this lowest point that the security of the party offers the greatest lure. The party can do the hard thinking, dictate life, it becomes something to trust in and give oneself to ultimately resulting in complete adherence and dependence. All thought of oneself becomes meaningless in the overwhelming glory and absoluteness of the party.
The nature of “Big Brother” is dependent on control of thought and actions. The means in which this is achieved is varied and complex, and in many ways are subversions and outright extreme literary comparisons to political speech, contrarian tactics, and direct government oversights. The very essence of Newspeak is the controlling of information and influencing of party doctrine by the culling of broad terminology in place of shortened thoughts and snippets of information. These are highlighted using simple terms which are supposed to define complex thoughts and feelings. Words such as “bellyfeel,” and “crimethink” are simplified words that remove the ambiguity and complexity from speech and thought. They are essentially shortened words attempting to remove expression and by extension freedom from party members. “Don’t you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it.” (1984, pg.52) Newspeak however is only one form of control; it can often be used in conjunction with Double Think. “Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one”s mind simultaneously and accepting both of them.” (1984, pg. 188) To shorten the vernacular of the populace while simultaneously creating the commonplace of outright hypocritical and opposing thought establishes an attack on the mind far more sinister than then any form of outright violence in the pursuit of security and control for the state. To hypothetically state that “Big Brother” is a bastion of democracy while simultaneously claiming that Democracy by nature does not work, creates a paradox that is only conceivable by surrendering more complex thought to Big Brother in accordance to their doctrine all while shortening that doctrine outright to remove any ambiguity and freedom of interpretation. Now the notion of internal thought serves as a breeding ground for contempt, disapproval, and potential seditious actions taken against “Big Brother” so it is be only natural to remove this hazard by criminalizing such thought entirely. “Thoughtcrime” is any such thoughts held in the privacy of a party member’s minds and hearts. How one can judge and condemn these heinous thoughts seems almost arbitrary. After all “Big Brother” cannot see into someone”s minds, or perhaps they can. The assumption of surveillance carries far more weight in privacy then it does amongst peers and crowds. The constant drone of the Telescreen, the ever-lacking privacy in the home, thin walls separating one from their neighbors. The paranoia serves to subjugate the minds of citizens far more than outright dictation. The threat of surveillance when asleep creates an environment in which at any moment, any mumble, any slip of the tongue can alert the party to traitorous thought. Perhaps most dangerously, is the destruction of trust between party members, friends, neighbors, lovers. If a child is willing to condemn their father for the utterance of “Thoughtcrimes” then the very notion of trust is lost entirely. No sanctity, no privacy, no intimacy, the entire population is alone except for the ever-comforting presence of “Big Brother.” The relinquishment of control offers the greatest comfort of all. Even during one’s own personal time, “ownlife,” one cannot escape the presence of the party, nor the influence it holds.
To have power, means to have control or at least the illusion of control. 1984 explores how this kind of control is developed and maintained. One need looks no further than the simple expression, “2+2=5,” a fundamentally wrong statement that denies the principles established by basic mathematics and common sense. If this sort of outright lie is to be accepted, it signifies a divergence from rational thought and absolute adherence to party logic and doctrine. If the party controls the ability of rational thought, then it is no small leap to see how they control the records of history and by that notion history itself. “Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.” (1984 Pg.3) It is stated in the party slogan and is only exacerbated by the very existence of Newspeak, if fallacy becomes reality, then the owner of that fallacy becomes the truth. “The greatest horror of 1984 is the dictators attempt to wipe out history.” (Two Winston”s Documentary) The erasure of people and events only scratches the surface of the horror of this reality. To rewrite history based solely on a whim or to garner support for any given political movement is a reality strangely similar to our own. It bears mentioning to a piece of Orwells previous writing and one that I feel is prevalent throughout 1984, “Political language is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind” (Why I Write, Cover Page) Pure fiction becomes believed when the erasure of history is propagated as the salvation of the state in contention to oppositional ideology. “The past was erased, the erasure was forgotten, the lie became the truth.” (1984 pg. 75) The two minutes of hate and hate week serve to destroy party tolerance to outside thought by screaming, booing, jeering, and outright violence. There is no place for reason in the party and no reason to listen outside of it. The idea of time itself becomes subjective based on the intentions of upper party members. The year, the title of the book may very well be completely arbitrary as it may have been repeated before. If date is only dictated by records, and time adhered to by men, then the system controls it all through the careful deconstruction and desecration of those established principles. The lies become facts for there is nothing to counter those facts as no records exist. “If the party could thrust its hand into the past and say of this or that event, it never happened – that, surely, was more terrifying than mere torture and death.” (1984 pg. 34) It begs the question, is reality defined by the minds of men? Or perhaps control is simply obtained by manipulating the thoughts of men, changing their reality as O’Brien did to Winston in the conclusion. It is not the ability to alter the past that truly establishes a sense of power and control but the ability to force others to adhere to that alteration.
1894 is a hard book for me to read. Very few other pieces of literature leave me as drained and contemplative, feelings of loneliness and isolation persist far after I have put the book down. It’s also a book that I find myself growing far more and more bitter with. Not because of the work itself, but rather what it has done to the political climate surrounding it. Heralded as a deep look at the danger of government control it is often misquoted and misidentified as a political attack on one side or the other. I have never seen a book used so regularly in political debate and argument outside of the Holy Bible. The book is far more than a criticism of government, Communism, and the creation of a surveillance state. 1984 poses a deep introspective look into the ideology and absolute perversion of the political landscape and attempts to control it. It actively describes political strategies, reconstructs them, and exacerbates them to fit into a broad stretching narrative critical of all forms of power. Stated in the provided documentary, George Orwell wrote with the idea of; “Purging the language of the pompous preaching of the official left and the nausea sentimentality of the romantic right.” (Two Winston”s, Documentary) 1984 is the culmination of totalitarian control and how through the isolation of its citizens creates a falsified history completely adherent to party agenda, doctrine, and ideology. Throughout the text we see Winston start off as an isolated man simply moving through his life while ultimately questioning his role and the role of “Big Brother.” At this point he is alone, devoid of connection and purpose. We see him shift and begin to take an active role in his own life once he couples with Julia. Once he has found purpose, he becomes livelier, more willing to disobey the teaching of the party. Ultimately when he is captured, isolated, tortured, and finally broken it is O’Brien who greets him, comforts him, and welcomes him back into the party. We see a happier Winston who once again has found a purpose, a changed man now happily engaged with “Big Brother” the same as he was when intimate with Julia. But the ultimate question past isolation of individuals for the determent of peer support and intermingling of ideas, is how “Big Brother” establishes control, and how it maintains its power. The answer is simple, “2+2=5.”
Leonardo Magazine 