|
Alright, hopefully you all finished the book like good little boys and girls. (well, boys and lilsusie to be specific  )
This thread will essentially be a no-holds-barred discussion thread, so anything goes. If you have a question/observation/theory/answer, just go ahead a post. At the top of your post try to highlight the chapter or part that you are referring to so people don't have to search frantically if they don't remember something.
To get the discussion started, I am going to post some questions here, most of which are from the internet as suggested book club questions (I <3 the internet) but there are a few of my own creation in there. If you feel like answering them, put the question you are answering above your answer. After that, feel free to discuss others answers or whatever, just be civil please. 
IF YOU ARE QUOTING SOMEBODY, ONLY QUOTE ENOUGH FOR US TO KNOW WHAT YOU ARE REFERRING TO, DON'T QUOTE 5 PARAGRAPHS TO ADDRESS ONE SENTENCE!
QUESTIONS:
1. What did you think about the title?
2. What did you think about Winston Smith? Is he a likeable character?
3. What did you think of the book overall? (Liked it/didn't like it/indifferent/etc.)
4. How does this book compare to other books you have read?
5. If you've read 1984 before, is this time around any different from your previous read(s)? Has your impression of Winston changed at all? What about the other characters?
6. How essential is the setting to 1984? Could the story have taken place anywhere else?
7. What are the conflicts in 1984? What types of conflict do you see? Are they physical, moral, intellectual, or emotional?
8. In 1984, is Winston consistent in his actions? Does he change or grow as a human being? How? Why?
9. In 1984, what themes stand out? How? Why?
10. Did you like the ending? Why or why not?
Alright, I am not going to answer the questions right away, because I think it would be unfair if I always got the first say in the discussion threads, so go ahead and answer/ask questions as you wish.
DISCUSSION COMMENCE!
|
3. I liked it. It captured my attention to say the least. I'd recommend it to anyone.
10. I liked the ending. + Show Spoiler +1984 was never about overcoming the system or even about hope. 1984 is simply about the ultimate authoritarian government designed to keep itself in power by all means necessary. I did not feel like it needed a typical "Hollywood style" ending.
Edit: added spoilers
|
1. I don't think its a very accurate title, Orwell wrote this a while back and he got a little ahead of himself time-wise.
4. Farenheit 451, it's about the main guy, Montag (BTW I think he's the firebat hero in Starcraft?) that has his own ideas different from his society. It's different though because it gives a ending of hope.
9. You can't trust anybody but yourself/ Winston was turned in by the only person he could trust.
What is popular isn't always right, what is right isn't always popular/ The whole concept of the book is his individualism.
10. The ending was good but it was pretty sad, I hated how it was so simple and it gives you the conclusion that the world lost all hope.
|
Oh, another interesting thing, but this might be just me, so it doesn't go in the OP.
When I read a book, I have trouble creating my own characters, so most characters in books that I read become either famous people or people that I know after a while. Wonder if anybody else does that too, and if so who the characters looked like to you.
Oddly enough, Winston never had a face to me, which worked I guess since we were seeing things from his pov.
Julia, as much as this pains me, was a combination of Monica Lewinski and some girl I had a crush on in HS.
Idk, it just matched well in my head.
O'Brien was a guy from my life, no pictures, sorry.
Big Brother = Stalin. No big surprise there.
|
1: I have no idea why they chose that title..
2: Winston Smith seemed to me, as a flaw to the "perfect" system, as said by O'Brian. ("You are a flaw in the pattern, Winston. You are a stain that must be wiped out.) (Orwell 255)
3: Indifferent, it showed us a world of utopia, of how people could be so heartless, and just live like robots, sort of gave me a fear.. but at the same time, carelessness, because Im so sure that its bound not to happen.
4: This book is incredibly long, and boring.. but TBH I really had no emotion toward it because It was an english assignment over the summer..
5: My perspective of Winston has not changed at all, he just seems to obviously be a problem of the heartless society, a person that could be with a sense of heart, and seeing what is wrong with this utopiatic environment..
7: The conflicts was obviously the rebellious thought of Winston, that started to mold into Julia. They were superbly moral, and emotional, along with a little intellectual, didnt see any physical, even if Winston and Julia had sex every time they met after having the conversation.
8: Winston had a very faithful approach, believing such blindfully into the Brotherhood, and its legends along with its fairytales of people secretly being in it, and one day would emerge from the ground against Big Brother
9: Themes of a perfect society (obviously) Dont really know
10: Sort of knew the ending, because they told us.. I really wanted to know what would happen really if the Brotherhood existed, there should be a sequel yay
Interesting Book, sort of gave me an urge to read a lot harder ones, you know, make my mind thinkin more
|
On December 02 2008 12:14 il0seonpurpose wrote:
9. You can't trust anybody but yourself/ Winston was turned in by the only person he could trust.
/ The whole concept of the book is his individualism.
I dunno about that. Winston is in horrible internal anguish throughout the novel until he meets Julia and O'Brien. It's true that those two turn out to be his downfall, but at the moment, they give him bliss and mental salvation.
I think the book stresses that individualism in thought isn't exactly this stand-alone magical concept that is invincible and solves all one's problems. You cannot simply think and hope that you will triumph, but must act accordingly. Nor can you rely on others to provide you your goals. Instead, you must take direct action for yourself and accomplish the task at hand, for no one will truly help you but yourself. Perhaps Winston can trust nobody in the novel, but I do not believe that is the message Orwell is trying to push. Because Winston relied too heavily on Julia, O'Brien, and the Brotherhood for internal and external deliverance, and did not directly act for his own sake, he failed in his personal struggle against the Party.
Thought vs. action. The Party seeks to suppress "thoughtcrimes" as vigorously as possible. That is because they know that thought will lead to action, which will lead to the overthrow of their power. However, many people, including Winston, do hold these thoughtcrimes. That is why people are arrested constantly. But as long as the Party can suppress these thoughts as soon as they appear on the surface in any form of action, then it is alright. The ultimate victory for the Party, as evidenced by the ending, is when those rebellious thoughts no longer pop up, squashing any chance for action to ever occur.
|
FuDDx
United States5015 Posts
I havent read this book in years.
That said all i can remember is being very dissaponted with the whole book.
It seems to me from my recolections that it was all hype,agian didnt enjoy it at all.
|
On December 02 2008 13:02 Folca wrote:
1: I have no idea why they chose that title..
As far as I know he wrote most of the book between 1947 and 1948 (->1984). This was the time in which the world saw the rise (and fall) of totalitarian regimes like the ones in Germany, Italy, Russia (this one especially since we have a socialist regime in Airstrip One and Big Brother can be seen to sort of resemble Stalin because of the mustache that is always mentioned), Spain, etc. So I guess he projected this trend to go on and wanted to show what the world could possibly become.
I'm not so sure about this theory, but I think Orwell also refers to the fear of nuclear escalation that was prevalent after the end of WW II and during the following Cold War. This would be the scene in chapter three where Winston ponders about the past and the time the atomic bomb had fallen on Colchester.
One funny thing I noticed when I read the book was that Rage Against the Machine quoted the party slogan from 1984 in their song Testify, not literally but unmistakenly:
Who controls the past now controls the future
Who controls the present now controls the past
Who controls the past now controls the future
Who controls the present now?
(chapter three as well)
EDIT: could a mod move this to the general forum?
|
I considered putting it in general, but irc cautioned me against it saying that we would get buried too quickly. Idk, if you guys think it is a good idea we can do it though. (Well, we can't do it, but I am sure one of our nice mod friends can )
|
Oh and I thought moving this to general would prevent it from getting buried to quickly : / Then lets keep it as it is; I've got the thread bookmarked anyways...
|
On December 02 2008 20:49 poilord wrote:Show nested quote +On December 02 2008 13:02 Folca wrote:
1: I have no idea why they chose that title..
... As far as I know he wrote most of the book between 1947 and 1948 (->1984). This was the time in which the world saw the rise (and fall) of totalitarian regimes like the ones in Germany, Italy, Russia (this one especially since we have a socialist regime in Airstrip One and Big Brother can be seen to sort of resemble Stalin because of the mustache that is always mentioned), Spain, etc. So I guess he projected this trend to go on and wanted to show what the world could possibly become. ...
Yes. 1984 is by and large, a political book. I believe it was in large part a reaction to the growing communism spreading throughout Europe, and more specifically, in Great Britain (where Orwell lived), in which socialism was taking hold as a result of the majority possessed by the Labour Party and the ousting of the Conservative Party as the majority.
EDIT: Grammar.
|
On December 02 2008 12:21 Lemonwalrus wrote:
Oh, another interesting thing, but this might be just me, so it doesn't go in the OP.
When I read a book, I have trouble creating my own characters, so most characters in books that I read become either famous people or people that I know after a while. Wonder if anybody else does that too, and if so who the characters looked like to you.
Oddly enough, Winston never had a face to me, which worked I guess since we were seeing things from his pov.
Julia, as much as this pains me, was a combination of Monica Lewinski and some girl I had a crush on in HS.
Idk, it just matched well in my head.
O'Brien was a guy from my life, no pictures, sorry.
Big Brother = Stalin. No big surprise there.
I imagine Big Brother very similar to Stalin, too.
I don't do that with characters, personally.
I haven't read the book in a long time, and had no idea this was going on, but I recall imagining Winston as a kind of fat guy, with a big double chin, and the top of his head was kinda small. I imagined him as the type of guy who would wear one of those hats like they wore in the 30's. He had a small stubby nose, kind of, and maybe a moustache, I don't remember. I definitely don't put famous people in there. I recall the girl being thin, with short blonde hair, and a very good figure. Blue eyes, somewhat pointed nose (not big, average size, but not a rounded tip on the nose), with a small, delicate face, and a small chin. I'm pretty sure that's not what the description of her was like at all though.
|
QUESTIONS:
1. What did you think about the title?
It was clearly outdated. I think it may have had more impact years ago, but I read it well beyond 1984 (though not for the club, specifically), and it really didn't mean much to me.
2. What did you think about Winston Smith? Is he a likeable character?
I always have a hard time with the "what did you think about X questions" so I'll skip that. I remember liking him more than I liked any of the other characters. I could empathize with the way he was feeling, and I think that's why I liked him.
3. What did you think of the book overall? (Liked it/didn't like it/indifferent/etc.)
I think it's probably one of the best books I've ever read. I recommend it to everybody. The ending is sad, but if you think about it, it's the only way it could end--so that doesn't really bother me.
4. How does this book compare to other books you have read?
Compare as in how is it similar or different? Or like what book is similar? I guess Fahrenheit 451 was similar, as someone mentioned, but the ending was totally different. Brave New World is the closest thing I've read, but it takes the opposite approach on the way the government operates (it's a seemingly benevolent government, and it doesn't kill dissenters, it just isolates them with other people who feel similarly). I think Brave New World would be the more likely of the two books to actually occur, because I think eventually people would get tired of living in such crappy circumstances, as they do in 1984. But then again, 1984 seems to assume that this is the way it had been for some time, and those that recognized the problems were so few, they were easy to get rid of, etc... I guess it's possible, because people are really apathetic to what governments do.
5. If you've read 1984 before, is this time around any different from your previous read(s)? Has your impression of Winston changed at all? What about the other characters?
I didn't read it this time, I'm basing it off of what I remember from a few years ago.
6. How essential is the setting to 1984? Could the story have taken place anywhere else?
As in, if it weren't a city in ruins, basically? No, not at all. The setting is essential to the mood of the story. If it's a nice place that they're living, then the overbearing government doesn't seem quite as bad. Because where they live is a gigantic piece of garbage, it tells you what Orwell wanted you to feel about Big Brother.
7. What are the conflicts in 1984? What types of conflict do you see? Are they physical, moral, intellectual, or emotional?
The conflicts are probably mostly moralistic. In the sense that freedom has been stripped away from these people. I'm kind of having difficulty remembering everything, so I'll stop there.
8. In 1984, is Winston consistent in his actions? Does he change or grow as a human being? How? Why?
9. In 1984, what themes stand out? How? Why?
Someone else said it was Winston's individualism that was the main theme, which is true, but I think the bigger, and far more obvious theme is the one that warns of the overly-powerful government. I don't know what word to use for that, but freedom (essentially) and the loss of it is a major point of the book.
10. Did you like the ending? Why or why not?
Yes. As I said in one of the earlier numbers, it's the only way the book could have ended. If it ended with a stupid feel good ending it would not have the profound impact that it has on so many people's thoughts. That society was so far beyond repair that it would never be repaired, and Orwell wanted to warn us about this possibility, and if, in the end, there is a glimmer of hope, his foreboding message is largely lost.
|
I thought it was really fascinating how the party managed to stay in power and which means it used to control the population (direct as well as indirect). We could probably discuss this as a later point when we got most of the initial reactions 
|
1. What did you think about the title?
The title was fitting in the sense that orwell wrote the book right after ww2, and seeing the current political situation, imagined a situation that was absurdly unlikely to happen that quickly, but one that over a period of a century or more could happen. The speed in which it happens is the key to his Title i believe as to give the readers his political commentary, as well as a general warning for society as a whole of "this is what could happen" and gives an incredibly long warning.
2. What did you think about Winston Smith? Is he a likeable character?
I don't really like Winston, he comes off as a negative, self centered cock. The thing is, he is what he is due to his ability to retain his memory in hts entirety, then use it as his foreground and all other information as a reference to what he knows to see truth or fiction. He is a very real character, as opposed to a likeable one.
3. What did you think of the book overall? (Liked it/didn't like it/indifferent/etc.)
The book is a very good read, I'm glad i finally have.
4. How does this book compare to other books you have read?
For the time of work that it is, it ranks very high, one that comes to mind that is similar is Brave New World, and this one is more real to me as a situation, more down to earth than BNW.
6. How essential is the setting to 1984? Could the story have taken place anywhere else?
For the time the book was written, the setting is a very effective place, as britain has been one of the prominent countries throughout history, so to have it in a way that they have become this entity is more likely to believe as they have more history for the power hungry to learn from compared to The USA for example.
7. What are the conflicts in 1984? What types of conflict do you see? Are they physical, moral, intellectual, or emotional?
I find most of the conflicts that i read to be ones of moral and intellectual, as by following winston, we are exposed to his personal beliefs, and those set on the people by big brother. These lead him to have personal battles within himself to determine if he is infact right, or if the doctrine pushed upon the masses is.
8. In 1984, is Winston consistent in his actions? Does he change or grow as a human being? How? Why?
Winston is consistent in that he acts on his beliefs, but at the same time tries to stay unnoticed. When he encounters julia however, he gains confidence to act out, and by feeling part of something when he joins the "brotherhood" he becomes more sure of himself, and that for the first time he is part of something. After his interrogation, he is still consistent on his beliefs, but only in the sense he is now part of the masses, and is part of them, with an intelligence able to comprehend, but ignore what he believes is wrong.
10. Did you like the ending? Why or why not?
I found the ending fitting as it was the story of someone who rebelled within himself and ends with him finding his personal peace. It wasn't a story of one man against a huge body and overthrowing it, as such i found him "losing" to be very fitting, as there could not be another one for winston smith, even he knew this.
|
hmmmm where are all the people? :|
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
they don't make dystopia like they used to
and thanks for the unwarranted reference to utopia. orwell was reacting against heavyhanded tactics of bureaucracy and control, not necessarily commenting on the prospects of utopian visions. the way war is depicted in this book should tell you at least that much.
|
heheh im using this thread to help me study for my 1984 test which is tomorrow
whats the next book eh?
|
Hmm looking at the response to this one I doubt that there will be a next book :|
Although I'd be all for it.
Probably would have gotten more hits in the General forum, we've talked about this though.
|
On December 12 2008 02:52 poilord wrote:
Hmm looking at the response to this one I doubt that there will be a next book :|
Yeah. 
I might try a revive once the stench of this one's failure lightens up a bit. I'm brainstorming ways to improve.
|
1984 was a very good year.... for small town girls.
|
On December 12 2008 08:12 Woyn wrote:
1984 was a very good year.... for small town girls.
?
|
On December 12 2008 08:12 Woyn wrote:
1984 was a very good year.... for small town girls.
living in a loooooonely woooooorld
|
***semi-hijacking this thread, but seeing as it's not that active it might actually wake some discussion into it. besides the whole point of 1984 is to make us be critical of where we are living. I read 1984 years ago ***
I have to say the more time pass I feel like my country is similar to the one described in 1984 and it's getting less and less subtle every day..
It doesn't matter if Israelis elect right or left we always get a leftist government in the past 15 years. In the 2003 election Halikud was against the Labor Party (right and left). The Labor campaign called for evacuating Jewish population from Gush Katif and the Shomron. Halikud went against that and it's leader said he will no more give Tel Aviv than give Gush Katif. Sure enough he won by a large margin for saying that and went along to brutally evacuate Gush Katif and part of the Shomron, executing the exact opposite thing he was elected for and suddenly enjoying huge media support, I forgot to mention his criminal records got mysteriously (yet every Israeli knows it) postponed until he finished the "disengagement"
In Israel 2008 all the ideologies of the 3 big parties' leaders are basically the same, the only thing that is looked at is their "personality". A deviant from that specific "ideology" means to be the enemy of the media. As a result Israel might be a democracy of people, but it's very close to being a dictatorship of ideas.
Our court system is completely corrupt. Just a small example of our corruption from last week: a 70 year old from Hebron with no previous record was lynched by Arabs and severely injured, he shot one of them for his defense and got out of there alive. He was immediately arrested and is now a week later in full house custody awaiting further trial, while the people who attacked him (their names and addresses known) weren't even called to give a statement, let alone stand to trial for what they did to him.
I have written SO little it goes on and on and on, as opposed to 1984 if you listen well you can hear what is going on, to describe all the wrongdoings of Israel democracy, court systems and media will take many books.
It's easier to call for change when a huge party is beyond you and the media is giving you supportive coverage. It's a lot harder when you are beyond a centralist 1984ish media system and corrupt court systems, when people are afraid to organize from fear of being arrested, when the police is used to crack skulls of their own people (Amona) and the army evacuates a family with 5 little children, destroying their house in the middle of the night without previous notice . When the voices of the people are being ignored and their minds brain washed..
Change might have come to America but I know that Israel is sadly very far from it..
|
lol it's funny writing all this than seeing the blog isn't bumped, it bumps in the Blog list but doesn't appear in the side bard, kinda ironic btw maybe some mod will move this to General?
|
Epic fail lul may i suggest reading books that are most common in academic related subject matter?
That and -> general = much more attendance.
|
On December 12 2008 13:13 HeavOnEarth wrote:
Epic fail lul may i suggest reading books that are most common in academic related subject matter?
May I suggest being less of a douchebag? meanie face?
Edit: The book was chosen democratically, in-case you are wondering why your post pisses me off.
Edit2: Not to mention posting 'Epic fail lul' right after somebody tries to revive the thread.
Edit3: Made my response nicer after initial rage subsided.
|
On December 12 2008 13:13 HeavOnEarth wrote:
Epic fail lul may i suggest reading books that are most common in academic related subject matter?
That and -> general = much more attendance.
As if 1984 wasn't one of the most canonical texts of the 20th century.
We could still try and get this thread moved to general.
|
1984 is a great book i should read it again ;(
heaven you fail :p
|
On December 12 2008 11:28 Locke. wrote:+ Show Spoiler +
***semi-hijacking this thread, but seeing as it's not that active it might actually wake some discussion into it. besides the whole point of 1984 is to make us be critical of where we are living. I read 1984 years ago ***
I have to say the more time pass I feel like my country is similar to the one described in 1984 and it's getting less and less subtle every day..
It doesn't matter if Israelis elect right or left we always get a leftist government in the past 15 years. In the 2003 election Halikud was against the Labor Party (right and left). The Labor campaign called for evacuating Jewish population from Gush Katif and the Shomron. Halikud went against that and it's leader said he will no more give Tel Aviv than give Gush Katif. Sure enough he won by a large margin for saying that and went along to brutally evacuate Gush Katif and part of the Shomron, executing the exact opposite thing he was elected for and suddenly enjoying huge media support, I forgot to mention his criminal records got mysteriously (yet every Israeli knows it) postponed until he finished the "disengagement"
In Israel 2008 all the ideologies of the 3 big parties' leaders are basically the same, the only thing that is looked at is their "personality". A deviant from that specific "ideology" means to be the enemy of the media. As a result Israel might be a democracy of people, but it's very close to being a dictatorship of ideas.
Our court system is completely corrupt. Just a small example of our corruption from last week: a 70 year old from Hebron with no previous record was lynched by Arabs and severely injured, he shot one of them for his defense and got out of there alive. He was immediately arrested and is now a week later in full house custody awaiting further trial, while the people who attacked him (their names and addresses known) weren't even called to give a statement, let alone stand to trial for what they did to him.
I have written SO little it goes on and on and on, as opposed to 1984 if you listen well you can hear what is going on, to describe all the wrongdoings of Israel democracy, court systems and media will take many books.
It's easier to call for change when a huge party is beyond you and the media is giving you supportive coverage. It's a lot harder when you are beyond a centralist 1984ish media system and corrupt court systems, when people are afraid to organize from fear of being arrested, when the police is used to crack skulls of their own people (Amona) and the army evacuates a family with 5 little children, destroying their house in the middle of the night without previous notice . When the voices of the people are being ignored and their minds brain washed..
Change might have come to America but I know that Israel is sadly very far from it..
It might take time, but I hope for you that things will change.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
