Login

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

March 29, 2024, 11:18:59 am

Author Topic: 1984 essay (part 2)  (Read 3208 times)  Share 

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

choc_bananas

  • Victorian
  • Forum Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 93
  • Respect: 0
1984 essay (part 2)
« on: October 31, 2007, 03:00:43 pm »
0
Here is a part 2 tr for 1984 done under the 1 hour time limit. Any feedback and some ideas for a mark out of 10 would be appreciated. :-)

Nineteen Eighty Four demonstrates that totalitarian regimes can only exist by destroying peoples capacity to think and feel.

Discuss

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

George Orwell?s 1948 dystopian novel ?Nineteen Eighty-Four? demonstrates that totalitarian regimes can only exist by destroying the individuals capacity to think and feel. To an ultratotalitarian regime like Oceania?s ?Party? it is necessary to control the thoughts and emotions of its people in order to prevent dissent and potential rebellion. Overt action begins first with thought and by crushing the potential for thought the physical act cannot occur. In this way Orwell is providing a warning to society and demonstrating the importance of individual and questionable thoughts and feelings.

For a totalitarian regime it is necessary to control the inner-most thoughts of an individual. As O?Brien tells us, the Party is not ?concerned with the overt act, it is the thought we care about?. This is because physical actions manifest themselves from rebellious thought. The Party is aware of this and out of concern prohibits all heretical thoughts, labelling them ?thoughtcrime?. It is initially thought which guided Winston to his disobedient path. Without that first thought he never would have brought the diary, had an affair with Julia or even committed himself to terrorist actions against the Party. So concerned with the fear of free thought is the Party that they eternally pursue its destruction.

To prevent rebellion a totalitarian regime develops ways to destroy an individuals capacity for free thought. The Party has numerous ways to cement its existence by destroying free thought. Newspeak, the creation of the States linguists, is one such way. As zealous Party member Syme puts it ?the intention of Newspeak is to prevent Thoughtcrime?. If there are no words to express revolutionary thought, so the logic goes, then the thought itself cannot happen. The Party also uses propaganda and mass hysteria (ie the Two Minutes Hate) to fill an individuals mind with pro-government ideas, opinions and beliefs. However, the Party?s most effective way to control the mind is through physical torture. The experience of Winston is testament to this as we can see through the burden of physical pain and agony Winston is made to believe ?for a fleeting moment? that ?two plus two make five?. Winston was wrong when he stated that they ?can make you say anything ? anything ? but they can?t make you believe it?. Through the abuse of power a totalitarian regime can maintain its authority by controlling the mind. However, there is one more threatening aspect of the individual ? the heart.

It is not merely enough for a State to control a person?s mind, to augment its power it must control what a person feels. Orwell demonstrates that if a person has sovereignty over their heart they will develop motions and allegiances against the ruling regime. If a person is able to love their children, husbands, wives, mothers, fathers or friends then they are a potential threat to the Party. These allow or complex emotions which can subtract from the Party?s need for the population to be kept in perpetual fear and hatred. The Party doesn?t want people to have friends, it wants people to have ?Party comrades?, it wants ?no love except that of love for Big Brother? and it will do anything it can to achieve this.

A totalitarian regime will take perverted action to control the inner most feelings and emotions of an individual. To destroy emotional attachment and feeling, the Party attempts to destroy the social units that harbour them. By using children as Spies and indoctrinating them at a young age they remove all loyalties except those to the Party. ?The family became, in effect, an extension of the Thought Police?. The Party is so successful, in fact, that the enigmatic sadist O?Brien claims ?we have removed the links between child and parent, man and man and between man and woman?. However sometimes the Party?s wish of ?no loyalty except loyalty to Big Brother? cannot be met. When this happens, as we see with Winston, the Party?s need to destroy individual feelings become apparent in the extreme measures they take to secure his emotions (Room 101 and the rats in the cage). In the end, that what we feel is ?inviolate?, the sanctity of the heart, is raped by the excessive oppression of a totalitarian regime. Winston had learned ?to love Big Brother? and the existence of the Party was maintained.

In ?Nineteen Eighty-Four?, Orwell is attempting to demonstrate to us that it is necessary for individuals to resist oppressive totalitarianism by thinking and feeling freely. The power of the Party can only be maintained by the destruction of this capacity. Through the protagonist Winston Smith ? the everyman ? we are shown this. If the individual does not think they are unconscious (like the Proles) and will be made subordinate by a ruling elite. Revolution, resistance and rebellion begin as abstract thoughts and concepts within the recesses of the mind and cannot exist unless and individual harbours their capacity to think and feel. The party?s concept that ?the individual only has power insofar as he ceases to be an individual? is nonsense (doublethink). The individual is what threatens the authority of a totalitarian regime and this is why the party in Oceania is so intent on destroying it. People?s capacity to think and feel threatens the existence of totalitarian regimes.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
b]History is the only laboratory we have in which to test the consequences of thought.[/b]
 - Etienne Gilson

brendan

  • Guest
1984 essay (part 2)
« Reply #1 on: October 31, 2007, 03:22:38 pm »
0
if you want to see a real life example of this go see North Korea. i like this line "the sanctity of the heart, is raped by the excessive oppression of a totalitarian regime"

choc_bananas

  • Victorian
  • Forum Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 93
  • Respect: 0
1984 essay (part 2)
« Reply #2 on: October 31, 2007, 03:25:17 pm »
0
Quote from: "brendan"
if you want to see a real life example of this go see North Korea


lol.
b]History is the only laboratory we have in which to test the consequences of thought.[/b]
 - Etienne Gilson

brendan

  • Guest
1984 essay (part 2)
« Reply #3 on: October 31, 2007, 03:26:20 pm »
0
i would have liked to read this text rather than the quiet american

choc_bananas

  • Victorian
  • Forum Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 93
  • Respect: 0
1984 essay (part 2)
« Reply #4 on: October 31, 2007, 03:31:11 pm »
0
i've read the quiet american its a great novel. I prefer 1984 though, when i found out we were studying it i was excited! i have enjoyed studying 1984 this year, i just hope i can translate my enjoyment of the book into a good mark on Friday!
b]History is the only laboratory we have in which to test the consequences of thought.[/b]
 - Etienne Gilson

choc_bananas

  • Victorian
  • Forum Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 93
  • Respect: 0
1984 essay (part 2)
« Reply #5 on: October 31, 2007, 05:28:17 pm »
0
any feedback? please!

 :D
b]History is the only laboratory we have in which to test the consequences of thought.[/b]
 - Etienne Gilson

ninwa

  • Great Wonder of ATAR Notes
  • *******
  • Posts: 8267
  • Respect: +1021
1984 essay (part 2)
« Reply #6 on: October 31, 2007, 06:44:21 pm »
0
I skimmed through it quite quickly so theres probably many things I missed (though of course the examiners will also skim through)

 - don't use abbreviations; instead of "i.e." use something like "that is,"

 - really good sophisticated language BUT ... sometimes I feel it takes away from the clarity of what you're trying to say. Keep it simple and concise! Sometimes I got a little lost as to what you were trying to say.

 - I would've liked to see you resist the topic a bit more. Examiners love it when you can also present a view as to why the contention in the question is inaccurate

Overall ... I think its definitely at least 8/10
ExamPro enquiries to [email protected]