User Controls
Syme was literally the singular sympathetic character in 1984
-
2015-10-23 at 5:34 AM UTCIntolerable cunts:
Winston - Mentality of a 14 year old, scarcely articulate despite being the narrator, can't stand up for his ideas except for in the most limp-dick imaginable way and flips shit and kills innocent people for no other reason than that he's an insecure cunt. Totally lacking a meaningful philosophy, requiring someone else's bullshit manifesto-insertion fanfic to even get hard, he deserved the rats and much worse for being such an intolerable lowbrow pussy.
Julia - Almost tolerable for having enough character to be hateable but in the end she's in Winston's boat: impotent. Fucking in the woods is what you do when you're a teenager, not when you're fighting tyranny. It represents total and unabashed conformity to the base natural state of man, to the flesh, to everything boring and mundane and trivial about the human condition while serving only to satisfy the party's ends through distraction.
O'Brien - Would have been vague enough to be likable or at least tolerable if not for the fact that his crowning monologue was cringey shit put in the mouth of imagined villains by generally incompetent writers.
Syme, however, is the only character with a hint of life going on outside of Winston's view, the only character who actually has a plausible motivation for his actions. Syme plays the game because he loves it, because that's what he is and he bends the world to his will through determination and vision, changing the very words beneath our feet. Considering 1984 was such trash as literature, failing to investigate any interesting element of the world, I choose to believe Syme knew full well what was in store for him, that he would be killed by the party ("killed" in his mind rather than Winston's notion of "unperson" (a term with an ironic ring of newspeak considering it is not, in fact, newspeak) because only the immature psychology of Winston would care more about attribution than far reaching effect on society) and participating anyway. Syme is the absurd hero of 1984, the true face of human determination and triumph, the indication that we as a species will continue to produce something worth having in the world. A creature crushed in every way we can imagine and yet who rose to the challenge, who saw his people destroyed and found for himself a role in rebuilding. Creation in the wake of total genocide, where Winston sees a people subjugated Syme sees a vacuum, a blank canvas to be filled and himself as the one with the determination and intellect to do it at any cost and in the face of any odds.
The real lesson to take from the trainwreck of a novel that is 1984 is that when the going gets tough the smart find the most interesting/worthwhile jobs they can and make the best out of it. Even if you detest the straw socialism which Orwell made a career out of knocking down you can't help but admit that Syme was the only character who managed to put his money where his mouth was. He could have been working for the nazis or the libertarian non-government or anyone else, he still would have been the only character with a spine. -
2015-10-23 at 5:49 AM UTCHuxley did it better tbh
-
2015-10-23 at 8:48 AM UTC
Even if you detest the straw socialism which Orwell made a career out of knocking down
...
Orwell was a socialist. -
2015-10-23 at 9:03 AM UTCWhen It comes to those kind of books I'm more of a phillip k dick fan. But its kinda like comparing apples and oranges. It was a good book though
-
2015-10-23 at 2:10 PM UTCLanny's literary critiques. Coming to a forum near you.
-
2015-10-23 at 3:54 PM UTCfuck 1984. its only purpose these days is so stupid people can feel smart, like theyre some sort of elite privileged scholar because they know about mass surveillance. fuck those people. fuck 1984. every time i hear some smart ass cocksucker open up his fuckin cockholster and start talking about some bullshit cocktail party banter i fuckin lose it. next thing you know the faggots gonna start spouting a bunch of feminsm because he read some bullshit about betas and now internalized it b/c he thinks it will get him laid.
its the same people who talk about quantum physics. just because you can repeat what you heard about a subject doesnt mean you know what youre talking about. -
2015-10-23 at 4:02 PM UTC
…
Orwell was a socialist.
A watery, wishy washy sort of socialist, but sure, he was a socialist. That doesn't change the fact that his commercially successful work has not in recent times been (and perhaps never was) read as a sincere condemnation of the political ideals that underride pretty much any leftist policy you're likely to find in the west. -
2015-10-23 at 5:48 PM UTCHis older brother was, Hymie, of the '60's Get Smart series.
-
2015-10-23 at 5:50 PM UTC
A watery, wishy washy sort of socialist, but sure, he was a socialist. That doesn't change the fact that his commercially successful work has not in recent times been (and perhaps never was) read as a sincere condemnation of the political ideals that underride pretty much any leftist policy you're likely to find in the west.
I actually think Animal Farm was his best work. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Yadayadayada. -
2015-10-23 at 7:49 PM UTC
A watery, wishy washy sort of socialist, but sure, he was a socialist. That doesn't change the fact that his commercially successful work has not in recent times been (and perhaps never was) read as a sincere condemnation of the political ideals that underride pretty much any leftist policy you're likely to find in the west.
Really more about authoritarianism. A society similar to his could come from both the left and the right. -
2015-10-24 at 12:09 AM UTC
I actually think Animal Farm was his best work. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Yadayadayada.
All animals are equal. Some animals are more equal than others -
2015-10-25 at 6:03 PM UTC
I actually think Animal Farm was his best work. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Yadayadayada.
IDK, animal farm seems even more condescending than 1984, going so far as to dress up a piss simple moral in the trappings of a child's parable (talking animals and shit). But "Absolute power corrupts absolutely" is kind of what I'm talking about, it's not an idea that's actually investigated in either book, it's just a floating assumption that we see Orwell fumble his way through paying out. Why does power corrupt? We're never given an answer, not even the usual platitude of "greed is endemic to the human condition". Like maybe animal farm carries the additional message that revolution/social change is futile but again, there is no meaningful question posed or answer given. I'm left at the end of all of Orwell's fiction asking "why?". Like I could write a story where on day one everyone is living free and happy in libertarian paradise, but then they start killing and raping each other because they're greedy or something and then write a few hundred pages of all the terrible things these fictional characters do to each other and end with them all existing forever in unimaginable suffering. Would that novel be profound? Would it be considered a worthwhile polemic? I sure hope not. -
2015-10-25 at 7:58 PM UTC
fuck 1984. its only purpose these days is so stupid people can feel smart, like theyre some sort of elite privileged scholar because they know about mass surveillance. fuck those people. fuck 1984. every time i hear some smart ass cocksucker open up his fuckin cockholster and start talking about some bullshit cocktail party banter i fuckin lose it. next thing you know the faggots gonna start spouting a bunch of feminsm because he read some bullshit about betas and now internalized it b/c he thinks it will get him laid.
its the same people who talk about quantum physics. just because you can repeat what you heard about a subject doesnt mean you know what youre talking about.
Maybe you shouldn't hang out with people like that^^^
anyways.....
It has something to say, but it's extremely basic.
like say.. Fight club
-
2015-10-25 at 8:19 PM UTC
Maybe you shouldn't hang out with people like that^^^
Maybe you and your family should make like Jonestown and mass an hero. -
2015-10-25 at 9:05 PM UTC
Maybe you and your family should make like Jonestown and mass an hero.
Grasping at straws eh? I told your mom last night after I paid her to help you with your post because they are kinda lackluster these days. Don't worry she's a good girl, you'll be aigght =) -
2015-10-25 at 9:31 PM UTC
Grasping at straws eh?
I don't think that means what you think it means, retard.
-
2015-10-25 at 10:02 PM UTC^I think it does bitch boi!
-
2015-10-25 at 10:25 PM UTC
^I think it does bitch boi!
Yeah you seem to have a lot of misconceptions you cling to. -
2015-10-25 at 11:11 PM UTC^quit shitting up lanny's thread idiot we were talking about books not your preoccupation you have with me dumbass, take it to my threads if you have a problem
-
2015-10-25 at 11:20 PM UTC
IDK, animal farm seems even more condescending than 1984, going so far as to dress up a piss simple moral in the trappings of a child's parable (talking animals and shit). But "Absolute power corrupts absolutely" is kind of what I'm talking about, it's not an idea that's actually investigated in either book, it's just a floating assumption that we see Orwell fumble his way through paying out. Why does power corrupt? We're never given an answer, not even the usual platitude of "greed is endemic to the human condition". Like maybe animal farm carries the additional message that revolution/social change is futile but again, there is no meaningful question posed or answer given. I'm left at the end of all of Orwell's fiction asking "why?".
There have been numerous studies done on the effects of power and authority.The Stanford prison experiment is the most famous one, although severely flawed. There's also a large pool of literature on political incentive and the dynamics involved.
Of course, he didn't go into that.
