Monday, January 5, 2015

Orwell is no Fitzgerald

The more I read, the more I become familiar with Orwell's writing style: simple and to the point.  After reading books like Life of Pi, Song of Solomon, and Handmaid's Tale, it is quite odd to read a book where an entire page is not devoted to describing a flower or the smell of ginger.  1984 may be fiction (science or dystopian) but there is no magical realism or magnificent imagery.  Now, don't get me wrong...I love to read elegant and beautiful imagery, like the literature of F. Scott Fitzgerald, but it is nice to read a book where descriptions are brief, the primary character is  not a tiger, and flying is something that only planes do.
Orwell's style is still unique even when compared to authors of similar novels.  Aldous Huxley wrote the dystopian fiction novel, Brave New World.   Both Brave New World and 1984 tell the story of a future dystopia under the control of a totalitarian government.  There are strong differences and similarities among the two authors and their styles:
Both authors use clear, simple vocabulary.  In general, Brave New World and 1984 (so far) are not difficult to read.  However, both authors show their complexity in the meaning and impact of their writing.
Huxley's work is more experimental than Orwell.  Brave New World is more abstract than 1984, however, both novels are a work of satire and irony.

Irony is a huge literary and stylistic device in 1984.  The irony serves its purpose to make the reader stop and think, and to emphasize a central point.
An obvious example of irony is the motto of Oceania:
War is Peace
Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is Strength (Orwell 18)
Right away one can see the flaws of Oceania.  The motto itself is an oxymoron; words being defined by their opposites.  The irony in the motto serves to highlight the contrast between America's principles and those of Oceania.  America strives for peace, provides freedom, and values strength.  Oceania contradicts the very foundation of  our society.

All four ministries are also examples of irony.
There is the Ministry of Truth, Love, Peace, and Plenty.
The Ministry of Truth is responsible for falsifying or "rectifying" any print (newspapers, articles, textbooks etc).  The purpose for rectifying is to make it appear as though Big Brother is and always was right...
"In this way every prediction made by the Party could be shown by documentary evidence to have been correct; nor was any item of news, or any expression of opinion, which conflicted with the needs of the moment, ever allowed to remain on record.  All history was a palimpsest, scraped clean and re-inscribed exactly as often as was necessary.  In no case possible, once the deed was done, to prove that any falsification had taken place." (42.)
Clearly, nothing about the Ministry of Truth is true at all.
The Ministry of Plenty is responsible for organizing Oceania's resources.  However, despite its name, all the Ministry does is set limitations and rations on food/goods.
The Ministry of Love has not played a significant role in the story yet.  However, Winston describes the "executions in the cellars of the Ministry of Love." (52)
And of course the Ministry of Peace is in charge of the ever-going war: strategy and weapon manufacturing.

George Orwell writes in a style that does not need multiple, extravagant literary devices.  The beauty is in the subtlety and conciseness.  The simplicity is not straightforward, but thought provoking. I believe the use of irony is an effective way for Orwell to get his point across.  All in all, Orwell's style is very different than most of the books I have read.  It is interesting to compare and contrast Orwell with Huxley, to see how their style affects their plot lines.  

2 comments:

  1. This post is so good! I'm not always excited about reading blogs on books I know nothing about, but I was actually really enjoying this. Your analogies are great and the passage is witty and informative. I would ask a question or something but honestly this was so well-written, you answered any questions I might have had. Really good job!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Does the simple, to-the-point style Orwell uses relate at all to the meaning he's creating in the novel? I like the comparison between the other authors' styles and Orwell's.

    ReplyDelete