Nineteen Eighty-Four Book Review
Orwell shows how maintaining power structure is beyond simply the use of state’s armed violence; it’s also in the formation of language.
Nineteen Eighty-Four is a novel written by English writer, George Orwell, which was first published in 1949. It is a satirical remark on the notion of totalitarianism; written in such harsh, no-nonsense style, which is perhaps why it is more closely regarded as powerful political speculation instead of an actual novel. Also perhaps why, to the readers, 1984 gives such sense of authentic portrayal to our political reality — and why it (and possibly will still) remain relevant in the future.
The story in 1984 is set in Oceania, which is positioned as one of three superpower states beside Eastasia and Eurasia — seemingly taking much influence from the World War 2. In Oceania, society is divided into three branches: (1) the first one is Inner Party, which consists of the upper class; (2) the second one is Outer Party, which consists of educated officers or workers; and (3) the third is Proles, referring to lower people of the working class. The members of Inner Party are the one who exercise power over the masses and maintain the state which serves as the embodiment of absolute power. People in Oceania are subjected to total control and surveillance in order to suppress any form of resistance which could threaten the status quo. Beside constant surveillance, people — especially members of Outer Party — are presented with the procession of Two Minutes Hate; which shows a picture of Emmanuel Goldstein — the prolific figure of Brotherhood, the revolutionary group. Goldstein is described as evil; the enemy of the state. By using Goldstein and the Brotherhood as the object of hatred, the state reinforce Big Brother, the leader of Oceania, as the messiah. In spite of all this, Winston Smith, the main protagonist in the story, emerge as the one who attain political consciousness. Winston Smith is an employee who works in the Records Department of the Ministry of Truth. His sole job, as the name of the Ministry he works in implies, is to rewrite history so that it benefits the Party’s agenda. Despite being the actual member of the state ideological apparatus, Winston Smith is described as feeling so frustrated by the state’s oppression through overly strict surveillance on the people; seizing their freedom. His form of resistance is shown through the act of secretive writing in his diary, in which he pours all feeling of disgust towards the state. While it may seem insignificant, what Winston does is extremely dangerous, since the state he lives in prohibit any forms of possible rebellion — let alone demonstration, even the very act of thinking about resistance is considered as a crime and will surely kill you.
Orwell’s vision of totalitarian state — exercised via an abuse of power, ideological brainwashing by constantly rewriting both the past and the future, total control over the masses via conducting strict surveillance — remains a hot topic in contemporary discussion on politics. Totalitarian state, doesn’t simply legitimize its existence via show off on a military power — constantly holding the people at gunpoint. Integrating potential rebellious masses which can put an end to status quo can also be done by incorporating other factors: the vernacular language, used by the people. Orwell understands this, and he brilliantly shows how Big Brother and the Party use language as the means of ideological control. See how Orwell use these set of phrases as the Party slogan: ‘WAR IS PEACE, FREEDOM IS SLAVERY, IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH’; which is repeatedly being mentioned throughout the novel. Also interesting is how Orwell described each Ministries under Oceania: Ministry of Love, Ministry of Truth, Ministry of Peace, and Ministry of Plenty. Through these use of contradictory language Orwell wants us to understand how the power structure is being maintained; language as means of surveillance — language as means of thought control. This is why the Party in 1984 goes to such great length in embracing Newspeak. In Newspeak, every single word is constructed in such strict way in which not only it eradicates Oldspeak words which carries an inherently ‘heretical’ meaning, but to the extent also carefully describes each words of their exact meaning, as well as possible subtle expression. If, the extent of thought (or thoughtcrime, in this sense) is derived from language comprehension, then it is necessary to throw away dangerous words; as well as every possible indirect way which can guide people to arrive at their secondary, which is deemed threatening, meanings.
And worse, we see these kind of things happening all the time: the masses is ‘disciplined’ by state apparatus in every mass demonstration; rioters being ‘questioned’ (instead of interrogated); or as of late, anarchy as synonym to violent conduct. These play of words — both in the forms of amelioration and pejoration — serve as means to justify state’s policy towards [domestic] protests; state [apparatus] as the righteous warden, preserver of peace. And rioters is seen as a disturbance to peacekeeping, a disorder conduct, who needs to be properly maintained.
