5 ms·
What a great article. I specially liked this bit: Orwell didn’t think that Dickens should have written different novels; he loved Dickens. But he understood th
by jackbravo 11y ago
What a great article. I specially liked this bit:
Orwell didn’t think that Dickens should have written different novels; he loved Dickens. But he understood that Dickens bore the ideological marks of his time and place. His class did not see the English social order as tyrannical, worthy of being overthrown. Dickens thought that large contradictions could be tamed through small moments of justice. He believed in the power of changing hearts, and that’s what you believe in, Orwell says, if you “do not wish to endanger the status quo.”
- clock_tower 11y agoI'm amazed that Gladwell didn't have more sense than that. Does he really think that someone who could fall for Communism could understand changing hearts and minds? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/POUM https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/POUM)
- TazeTSchnitzel 11y agoIsn't that essentially an ad hominem?
- clock_tower 11y agoAgainst which party? I don't trust Orwell's judgement -- fighting for POUM, and making the argument above, weren't the only errors he made -- and I don't think Gladwell should have trusted it either. (But then, Gladwell wrote a book called _The World is Flat_ in 2000, and it was about free trade, not fundamentalism; he's not exactly someone who I look to as a paragon of good judgement either.)
- hartpuff 11y agoPOUM was anti-Fascist and anti-Stalinist. If you think it was an error to support such a party in Spain at that time, I'm afraid it says more about your judgement than Orwell's.
- clock_tower 11y agoAnti-Stalinist isn't anti-Communist. (Sorry for the extremely late post, though.)
- griffinmahon 11y agoIn addition to your misreading of Homage to Catalonia, you also misattributed -- the author you're looking for is Thomas Friedman.
- ktRolster 11y agoIt's also the only practical thing to do if the status quo is against you.