George Orwells 1984 and Americas Political News Media - Book Report/Review Example

George Orwell's 1984 and America's Political News Media 1984, George Orwell's ic satire on totalitarianism, is widely regarded as a typical example of political literature where numerous governmental machineries to retain power are thoroughly exposed. Written in 1948, this novel soars beyond its time and prophesizes a world of political propaganda, false hopes and disillusionments. One of the fundamental reasons behind the scholarly acclamation of this novel is its perfect depiction of governmental surveillance on the lives of citizens. The fictional regime depicted in 1984 is centered on Oceania, one of the three political super powers. This one and other two are perpetually at war with each other to keep a control over their respective party members. Orwell tried to project his own vision of totalitarianism by imagining a world of extreme power games where every individual is compelled to feel repressive with regards to his/her free will. At the time of writing down the novel, he experienced the overhauling nature of stifling political dominance in Russia and Spain. He observed how the rise of communism in these nations after the Second World War led to the termination of basic civil rights, welfare politics and economic force. Moreover, the relevance of the novel is aptly suited to electoral governance in many countries around the world, especially in matters of how the state manipulates the mind and will of the voters in order to achieve its own doctrinal goals. This article is going to relate to the present political scenario in the United States of America with what is portrayed in George Orwell's 1984. Apart from totalitarianism, the other major themes around which the plot develops are nationalism, censorship, language and thought process, mass surveillance, Stalinism, individualism, sexual repression, loyalty, technology and poverty. (GradeSaver 1999-2009) Reversal of terms, i. e., a deliberate ploy to mean the exact opposite of what is being said, is the primary literary technique adopted in the novel to render the satirical essence to the novel. Society is shown to be a mere pawn at the whims and fancies of the threefold faces of a single, totalitarian regime - Eastasia, Eurasia and Oceania. The etymology of party machineries exposes how the facts are designedly reversed to mislead the mass. Thus, the Ministry of Peace involves blunt warfare; the Ministry of Truth deals in lies; the Ministry of Plenty can only guarantee starvation and poverty and the Ministry of Love exerts harrowing physical and psychological torture upon dissidents. The governmental impertinence shown in 1984 does not bear any coincidental element, but depicts doublethink - a political device that lures the ignorant mass to believe two conflicting ideas simultaneously. Doublethink is another significant thematic construct used in the novel to portray how political powers strive to remain on thrown by encouraging contradictory doctrines. The themes involving the establishment of an ideal social order on the basis of equality and fraternity are addressed from a radically practical perspective, thus disclosing the yawning gap between the policies adapted by political powers and society's response in accepting them. The fictional world created in 1984 presents a broad spectrum of terminologies that have made to the mainstream socio-political dictum in modern times. Ingsoc, for example, refers to the ideology of the totalitarian government of Oceania. Newspeak is the Party's minimalist language projected as a linguistic vehicle to voice the radical principles of Ingsoc. (Rossie 2001) The revolution and the war are two major components of this fictional world, each being a part of the broader picture of contemporary and futuristic global politics. Orwell goes at length to depict how the revolution occurred when Eurasia, one of the three superstates, was formed. The timeline here is shown sometime after the Second World War when American soldiers left Europe. This event allowed the Soviet power to arrive and gain control of Europe without much resistance. While Oceania represents the United Kingdom, Eurasia is placed aside since it is in alliance with the United States. The war in the novel occurs among the three super powers to flaunt their supremacy over each other. It symbolically represents the overwhelming political desire to gain and retain control over the less powerful and pliant civilians of a country. Thus, when the protagonist Winston Smith, a bureaucrat at the Ministry of Truth, is subjected to inhuman torture by officials of the Ministry of Love, there is a subtle hint of the inherent helplessness of the mass before the aggression of power craving political regimes. The projected timeline of the novel is believed to be between 1920 and 1960, reflecting the Smith's job of rewriting the history according to the party propaganda. In other words, true historical facts are deliberately tampered with to meet the requirements of the party line. As Noam Chomsky sees, "Pointing to the massive amounts of propaganda spewed by government and institutions around the world, observers have called our era the age of Orwell." (Chomsky 1987-1988) The party for which Winston works believes in establishing an orthodox system of governance where nobody will be allowed to exercise his/her individuality. The oppressing political mechanism is best represented through the surveillance system in the form of telescreens that acted as the BIG BROTHER: "BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU, the caption beneath it ranWinston turned a switch and the voice sank somewhat, though the words were still distinguishable. The instrument (the telescreens, it was called) could be dimmed, but there was no way of shutting it off completely." (Orwell 2) An overpowering control mechanism rules the routine affairs of the mass: "Any sound that Winston made, above the level of a very low whisper, would be picked up by it; moreover, so long as he remained within the field of vision which the metal plaque commanded, he could be seen as well as heard. There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment. How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork." (Orwell 3) Under such conditions, Winston's task is cut out. He has to recreate the historical documents obtained from old newspaper records to match them with convenient truths contrived by the party. This well-formulated propaganda machine owned by the Party in Oceania is responsible for broadcasting all Party lines and information. The distorted facts and figures are supplied by the Ministry of Truth, and are set by the Party. Now the above mentioned theme in 1984, if analyzed in the context of American governmental policies, shares striking resemblance with the regime of President Woodrow Wilson during the First World War. A process known as 'historical engineering', facts of history were deliberately altered by American historians to serve the purpose of state policymaking. (Chomsky 1987-1988) The slogan of the Outer Party under which Winston is employed is "who controls the past, controls the future." (Orwell 35) This shibboleth is self-explanatory of the discreet mechanism of the Ministry of Truth - they do not want the party members to recognize the true nature of the past. (1984 - George Orwell 2009) Winston in the course of the novel gets disillusioned of the task he is assigned to, and starts thinking about making a revolt against the BIG BROTHER and the Party. At the same time he is well aware of the fact that if he is caught doing so, his life may come to an agonizing end. The oxymoronic slogan of the Party "WAR IS PEACE / FREEDOM IS SLAVERY / IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH." (Orwell 4) glares threateningly at the 'unpersons', forcing them to comply with party propaganda. The idea of the Thought Police is another important contribution of the author when it comes to portraying the reprehensible nature of the Party. Albeit Winston works for the mechanism, he can hardly accept the principles of Ingsoc and the Party. Not only does he condemn the alteration of past, he is also against the trespassing of Thought Police in matters of privacy, love and freedom of the general folk. Orwell masterfully introduces the concept of 'thoughtcrimes' - a phenomenon characterized by mental violation of the norms of society prescribed by the oppressive regime. In his secret diary Winston explains thoughtcrime: "Thoughtcrime does not entail death. Thoughtcrime IS death." (Orwell 28) It typically signifies a bureaucratic controlling procedure which can be related to the art of democracy in the United States of America. Famous American journalist Walter Lippmann commented in 1921 that democracy dictated by power demands 'manufacture of consent'. Just like 'Big Brother', 'Newspeak' and 'doublethink', this phrase directly implies the Orwellian concept of thought process. The state mechanism in the United States of America, or for that matter in any nation, cannot gain ascendancy over freedom of thinking of its citizens. However, what it can do is to maneuver what they think. (1984 George Orwell 2009) Furthermore, the propagandist doctrine of setting thinking constructs, as portrayed in 1984, bring out the true nature of utilitarian philosophy. Rather than reading the mind of citizens, the doctrine states plainly what it wants of them. The state inventory scores over the mass in one crucial aspect and that is force. By using the force, the Party can subjugate its members. Contrary to this, democratic political systems cannot function by outright denial of people's opinion. The government in a democratic setup is liable to consider what people say. America has adopted a policy that balances between its own requirements and people's voice. This policy narrows down the debating options available to the citizens. Now while the citizens may think that they have been given the right to chose freely from a plethora of alternatives, what happens in reality is that they are provided with select alternatives as fixed by the political machinery itself. It can be compared with the electoral system. The pertinent question remains, are we really free to elect the candidate we would like to rule Apparently we are because we have the power to cast our precious votes that can determine the fate of candidates. But a closer examination might reveal the subjacent irony of the entire voting system. Suppose we are given a list of five candidates from which we have to elect a single one. Now this list of five is chosen by the state machinery. The mass is not entitled to opt for anyone who they think is best suited for running the government. So effectively we have been given a limited option of five and we must stick to that only. In keeping with the propagandist viewpoints of America, the Vietnam War deserves a special mention. Just like the war in Orwell's 1984, the Vietnam War stormed the U. S. media with debates. The state controlled the issues of the debates quite diplomatically, always making room for certain assumptions that both parties will have to abide by. Both 'doves' and 'hawks', despite their differences of opinion on the justifiability of the war and its ensuing damage, agreed upon one assumption - America had a right to raise war against South Vietnam. The terrifying nature of the attack on South Vietnam is difficult to justify on the pretext of providing 'defense' to Southeast Asia. It is just the same as reversal of facts which is prolifically used in 1984. War on Vietnam cannot be termed as defense because it was meant to be aggression. (Chomsky 1987-1988) Partially deviating from the constructs of propaganda, the system used in the congressional vote on contra aid in March 1986 recalls the bullying influence of Big Brother in Orwell's 1984. Media played at the hands of the political doctrine which tried to lessen the effect of damage, needless to mention erroneously, in Nicaragua. Majority of debates on America's attack on Nicaragua involved a dubious and unacceptable verdict that glorified the terrorists operating in Nicaragua, attempting to draw an electoral favor for the ruling government. The intention was to legitimize the attack so that people may be brainwashed to believe that the state operative system was inerrable. Big Brother in Orwell's 1984 perceives itself to be all-powerful. Projecting this kind of infallibility notion of the Party is nothing but a tactics guilefully deployed to disengage the thinking mind from drawing logical conclusions or rebellious attitude: "It includes the power of not grasping analogies, of failing to perceive logical errors, of misunderstanding the simplest arguments if they are inimical to Ingsoc, and of being bored or repelled by any train of thought which is capable of leading in a heretical direction. Crimestop, in short, means protective stupidity. But stupidity is not enough. On the contrary, orthodoxy in the full sense demands a control over one's own mental processes as complete as that of a contortionist over his body. Oceanic society rests ultimately on the belief that Big Brother is omnipotent and that the Party is infallible. But since in reality Big Brother is not omnipotent and the Party is not infallible, there is need for an unwearying, moment-to-moment flexibility in the treatment of facts." (Orwell 211-212) Indeed, Big Brother in Orwell's 1984 is suggestive of the party lines in many political systems. 'Blackwhite', one of the Newspeak terms, is a juxtaposition of two different ideologies propagated by Big Brother. A Party member must display his/her loyalty in calling Black White and vice versa if the Party demands so. Hence, the suspension of brain in political games of power riding was envisaged long ago by George Orwell. There are plenty of examples to reveal the naked truth behind the U. S. democratic policies with regards to conducting elections that had no more than outright farcical episodes. As America provided support to the worthless government in El Salvador in the early 1980s, important facts were suppressed by the leading media houses so that the purpose of the ruling party was met. The fact that El Salvador turned into a land of bloodshed in 1982, the year when election was held in America, was deliberately brought out in 1989 by the New York Times. Both the left and the liberal stood no chance of getting mass support, especially after the gruesome picture of homicide in El Salvador. It was only after the Left managed to make an impression in the country in 1989 that distorted facts were reproduced by media before the mass. Instances of Doublethink were also apparent in the way media reports on the duty of the U. S. military forces hit the press. Warren Hoge of the New York Times reported that "Members of the military are not allowed to vote, and the armed forces has pledged to protect voters from violence and to respect the outcome of the election." (Herman 2005) The irony is that armed forces were actually performing the task of dismantling the transparent voting procedures by provoking unprecedented terror in El Salvador. This type of political propaganda clearly shows a striking resemblance with George Orwell's dystopia in 1984. (Herman 2005) Arbitrary alteration of historical facts to fuel the interest of the Party was something that had never been discussed before in fiction writing. The inherent flaws and deceptions in the socialist perspective of election in the United States of America are discussed at length in the interview of Edward S. Herman, an economist and media analyst and also the Professor Emeritus of Finance at the Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania. He cites examples of 'sham' elections in places such as Iraq, Nicaragua and Vietnam. The election in Nicaragua in 1984 demonstrated Media's double standards that only complied with state interests. Indiscriminate freedom was given to the press by the Sandinistas so that all candidates could run freely. Herman argues that the Orwellian propaganda services were beautifully exemplified in the interpretation of fair election by the press and news media. According to him, the Nicaraguan election was held far more transparently than the El Salvador one. There are ample amounts of empirical evidences to support this statement. Yet, Dan Rather and a few other illustrated pressmen regarded the El Salvador election as a promising step towards establishing democracy. (Herman 2005) In book 1 (the book of 'Big Brother') of 1984, Orwell makes a curious observation regarding the Party mechanism which impinges upon the privacy of individuals. A strong undercurrent of satire seems irrefutable when the author remarks that everybody belongs to everybody. This statement sums up the essence of George Orwell's 1984 perfectly. The irony lies in the fact that in a true democratic setup, every individual lives for the welfare of another individual. But with Big Brother keeping its strict and impudent vigil on each and every movement collectively, nobody is free to voice his/her opinion for fear of severe punishment. (Clodius 57-59) Thus we see how Winston, despite his abasement in carrying out the orders of the Outer Party, never really gathers enough courage to break free in the beginning. The pseudo-democratic nature of the Party propaganda can be applied to the election mechanism in the United States of America as well. Works Cited Orwell, George, and Erich Fromm. 1984: a novel. New York: Signet Classic, 1990. Herman, Edward S. "An Interview with Edward S. Herman: "Freedom is not on the March"." International Socialist Review 41 (2005). Chomsky, Noam. "Propaganda, American-style." zpub.com. 1987-1988. 3 March 2009 Clodius, L. "Orwell and socialized medicine - a European view." European Journal of Plastic Surgery 16 (1993): 57-59. GradeSaver. "1984 Study Guide." 1999-2009. 3 March 2009 1984 - George Orwell. 2009. 3 March 2009 Rossie, David. "Political Definitions Are Orwellian Newspeak." Binghamton Press & Sun-Bulletin 27 June 2001. "1984 George Orwell." SparkNotes. 2009. 4 March 2009 Read More