He was poor growing up and you've also provided no proof that "1984" was pro-capitalist propaganda. I believe they were fat men of the past who controlled the world with top hats in the novel. If I remember correctly.harhol said:Orwell's version of socialism: "Oh, look at all the poor people, isn't it terrible. Fetch me my binoculars and I will observe them and pass judgment. All shall heed what I have to say because I am a novelist and occasional essayist."PersianLlama said:Um, George Orwell was a socialist I believe.harhol said:1984 is nothing but pro-capitalist propaganda.
I would suggest reading Brave New World instead.
In other words, those who consider Orwell a genuine socialist are deluding themselves and insulting the working class.
(Also, capitalism and socialism are not necessarily mutually exclusive.)
Bummer bro, bummer. I'm sure that there are people who love the book, and think it's great, but unless your big on literature, you'll want to bash your head into a wall.mydogisblue said:mokes310 said:1984 is my favorite book. I was actually thinking about picking it up and reading it again. Probably the only book that I enjoyed reading in high school. Just pray to the gods that you don't have to read A Tale of Two Cities. I'd rather read the dictionary than that piece of garbage!
Damnit......
We do.....
Apparently you need to provide proof since everyone thinks you're way off.harhol said:Why do I have to provide proof? It's bleedin' obvious. 1984 has been a bible for "I want my freedoms and I want them now!" neo-liberal fundamentalists for decades. Any time anything state-centric is announced we hear cries of, "OMG, 1984 iz 4 real!!!!!" He even insinuates that a communist state - sorry, a fictional totalitarian state - is intrinsically anti-Jew, itself (ironically) echoing one of the oldest racial stereotypes in the book.PersianLlama said:You've also provided no proof that "1984" was pro-capitalist propaganda.
Fuck Orwell, seriously.
Add in the fact that a lot of Oceania is based off of Stalinist Soviet Union, and that easily explains why it is YOU who should be providing the proof and not t'other way 'round.In the essay "Why I Write", Orwell explains that all the serious work he wrote since the Spanish Civil War in 1936 was "written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialismharhol said:And I reject the notion that you can shun communism yet also remain a socialist.
I HATED that book with a passion. We read it last year and my teacher wouldn't shut up about how good it was. We read it, and it blew. I hoped I had nothing to do with it again.mydogisblue said:Charles Dicken's Great Expectations, (and I don't care how good people say it is, I did not like that book at all)
1984, probably one of the best pieces of fiction and so relevant to the world today. Look for comparisons between what is going on in the book and modern political, atmosphere.mydogisblue said:Well, it's been a couple months in to the school year over here and we're starting to read 1984. We've already read Edith Hamilton's Mythology and Charles Dicken's Great Expectations, (and I don't care how good people say it is, I did not like that book at all) and now, like I said, we're about to read George Orwell's 1984.
I'm telling you guys this because I'd like to know what you guys think of this book and how good is it?
Honestly, I can't wait to read it, I've been hearing it's a spectacular book.
"As an ideology, Communism is usually considered to be a branch of socialism, a broad group of social and political philosophies, which draws on the various political and intellectual movements with origins in the work of theorists of the Industrial Revolution and the French Revolution."harhol said:?PersianLlama said:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism
There is no concrete definition of socialism or communism. You can take socialism to mean the entirety of the fifth stage, or you can take it to mean collective ownership of the means of production, or you can simply say it involves a state-centric focus. My opinion is that rejection of communism necessarily implies a rejection of fundamental socialist principles, regardless of whether or not anyone identifies himself as a "socialist". Therefore you cannot claim be a socialist of any kind if you reject communism, since socialist principles are as fundamental to communism as anything else. Any embrace of socialism has to recognise communism as a legitimate philosophy. Orwell doesn't, so in my book he is not a socialist.
Yeah, any time you see a room marked "101" you'll get the chills.Deschamps said:Once you read 1984 you'll start to notice a lot of references to it in places you wouldn't expect.
Um... Western Europe. Oh, and Social Security. Really, depending on how you define socialism, you could make a serious claim that almost any country in the world is "communist." Even the United States has socialist tendencies, beyond the aforementioned. The financial bailout(s) are basically socialist. They are certainly not purely capitalist. The pure capitalist response would be to let these firms fail. Check out Mitt Romney's analysis of the automaker bailout if you don't believe me: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/19/opinion/19romney.html?_r=1&scp=3&sq=let%20detroit%20fail&st=cseharhol said:Obviously there is no scientific proof since everything is based on opinion. However, I did find this:
"The Socialist Fallacy"
Scott Lucas argues that Orwell's status as the secular saint of socialism is built on a myth
http://www.newstatesman.com/200005290038
And I reject the notion that you can shun communism yet also remain a socialist.
Same here. But PersianLlama is right; if you liked 1984, you'll like Animal Farm. They're sort of a literary Dynamic Duo.crimson5pheonix said:I wish I went to your school...mydogisblue said:. . .Well thats interesting because that just happens to be the next book we are reading.PersianLlama said:Edit: Also, read Animal Farm if you enjoy 1984.
You disgressed but yes, the Mars Trilogy is a pretty good read although it's a bit long and very political by the third book. Plus there are so many characters you better not stop between one book and the next or you will have trouble remembering them all !crimson5pheonix said:Because this is a book thread, I have to endorse my favorite trilogy of books. Read The Mars trilogy by Kim Stanley Robinson. It's a very good political read.