1984 - What's YOUR opinion? Rate here!!! (1 Viewer)

[Gregor Samsa]

You could say that, but the 'happiness' is artificially created, and used as a means of upholding the dystopic Brave New World.

To quote John The Savage;
I'd rather be unhappy than have the sort of false, lying happiness you were having here.

However, I would agree in that the people within the BNW are depicted as happier than those of Nineteen Eighty-Four, most likely due to the varying methods of oppression, and targets of satire within each text.

 

[Alexander]

I liked brave new world. It seemed so perfect. Damn you Savage, I dont care what point you tryed to make, Brave New World is good enough for me. Screw the masses; tell them they're happy, give them their classes and duties and there you have it--peace on earth.

 

[hurrotisrobbo]

But there are always those that don't fit, etc, etc...

 

[lazybum]

ok - brave new world the next book on my shopping list

 

[Alexander]

"Both arrre eeesssential rrreading, ya" -professor High-Brow

 

[smegger_em]

I always thought that both BNW and 1984 were so brilliant in theory that the books themselves could never live up to the ideas that they contained (if that makes any sence)

The idea of newspeak, of thought police, of soma, they're all so brilliant and thought provoking and frightening. but i dont think that either (BNW in particular) was able to provide a narative of similar excellence

Still, both fantastic, fantastic, fantastic.

 

[Ocker]

I like 1984, BNW, and also Starship Troopers, because they (in parts) depict how I envision a perfect society.

 

[Gregor Samsa]

Originally posted by Ocker
I like 1984, BNW, and also Starship Troopers, because they (in parts) depict how I envision a perfect society.

Out of curiosity, which aspects of these constructions would you envision out as a 'perfect society'? (The stratification? The societal oppression? The oligarchic system? The 'endless holiday from reality'? Without disparaging your opinion of course..)

Returning to 1984 itself, I recently re-read this for university preperation, and it has become increasingly frightening in terms of the political climate. Besides the possible parallel between Emmanuel Goldstein and Osama Bin Laden,[In terms of each being a figure of fear, and in an indeterminate location, if alive]
this quote strikes me in terms of political parallels;
Whatever the Party holds to be truth, is truth.

While intended both as nightmare and contextual political commentary, the corncucopia of lies surrounding the 'War On Iraq' allows it to appear as being merely an exaggeration of the present. (Which is of course a key reason BNW and 1984 have endured. Both are very prescient texts, and as such, the social commentary composed seventy-two or fifty-six years ago remain relevant.)

 

[Ocker]

I should have made myself a bit clearer, sorry Gregor Samsa.

The aspects you mentioned - I in know way advocate.

I am totalitarian, although I avoid that term due to the connotations that come with it.

I do not believe in oppression, propaganda and other things associated with these books, nor the oligarchial systems.

Rather, I believe in unity, citizenship as portrayed ST to some aspects, and strong leaders, who have no need to lie like our current ones. I do not believe in one autocratic leader, but rather something of a strong collectivist system, where Citizens and chosen administrators all have power. I guess this sounds communist, Stalinist even, but I feel communism to be just as bad as our current stagnant democracy.

I hate the way in which large corporations handle themselves, especially in such fields as science, where the dollar is all too important.

I am probably not the best person to explain my beliefs.

You can check out www.politicsforum.org and head to the Platonism section, I don share all the beliefs said there, but you should get a general idea.

Hope that all makes sense :S

 

[gloria*]

Ocker I am with you on the totalitarianism allll the way.
Fuck literature, fuck art, just give me a sweet deal of citizenship and a wholllle lot of united love.

And I think it is totally possible to have a totalitarian society (aside from those nasty connotations) that does not walk hand in hand with oppression and minority conformity.

I believe in cold things, sturdy things, things for the greater good and the greater economy and I too, believe there is a leader somewhere in the world who has no need to lie.


gjfksghjwkghajkg.

(a little confused as to whether this is the Fantasy thread or the 1984 thread, )

 

[Ocker]

Fuck literature, fuck art

Exactly what I was talking about.

If someone is communist, it doesn't mean they are Stalinist, the same applies here.

I, and many other totalitarians get hit with this sort of stuff all the time, aswell as "You're a fascist who wants to control people's minds" blah blah blah.

Art and literature is very important, it is the ability to do, and enjoy such things is part of the many things that make us human.

Many people think of a totalitarian world as one where people go to work, go home, sleep, repeat. [Also sounds like our lives now :mad1: ]

This is not so, at all.

 

[gloria*]

Ahaha.

Look - if you're so into it all, then I think you'd have to be the first to admit the blunt and obvious fact that totalitarianism (note that I did not say 'regimes' because I am nice sometimes ) is based on a certain amount of control -->> control in any society is based to a certain extent on fear and deprivation of knowledge in order to prevent communities branching from the unified structure into their own minority groups (I doubt I need to mention Korea). If you allowed this, you'd be defying the nature of totalitarianism and 'unity' in any sense; and you can't have differentiated unities because that then would not be totalitarian, particularly in relation to contemporary societies and globalisation etcetc.

For the record though - I do believe in social control, though definately not to an extent worth deliberating over. I.e., I realise the necessity and importance of censorship, the with-holding of certain information / knowledge for a [politically + socially decided] greater good. And it need be recognised that all societies are based on this anyway.

I don't think you're a bad person for wanting a structured and safe and civil world. I want for it evvvery daaay.

 

[Ocker]

Yes, you are correct. All government boils down to control, and yes, I believe some times it has to be necessary to silence minorities who act in a way that is negative to the majority, especially during a transitional stage.

But eventually, there would be no need for dissent. There will always be crime - one must not be to utopian - but criminals would not just be locked up and fed by tax-money, they would serve a rehabilitation period, where they would also do some form of labour so they still benefit society whilst they are in prison.