4 ms·

Well, it's an easy argument to use against people you don't like. The article's point is true though. As a novelist he really wasn't that outstanding, his prose

by xtho 17y ago

Well, it's an easy argument to use against people you don't like. The article's point is true though. As a novelist he really wasn't that outstanding, his prose is repetitive---it's not as if 1984 wouldn't have benefited from another editing round.

weaksauce 17y ago
There are few books that I read in which I say to myself "Man that is a well written piece of literature that could not benefit from a bit of editing" I think that 1984 was a good book, maybe even great, but I would not say that it did not get a little long in the tooth and repetitive near the end. Don't get me started on the dan brown novels and the male chauvinistic nature therein. I just don't get why he needed to include a clueless female character in every book he has written just to provide someone whom the main character can lecture condescendingly. BTW. this is coming from a guy who is not overly sensitive to female equality issues but was smacked in the face by them after reading the Da Vinci Code.
jacobolus 17y ago
More than that, his characters and societies in 1984 are so one-dimensional as to be completely unrealistic, and therefore frankly pretty boring. In the real world (even in the worst totalitarian dictatorship, or in e.g. prison torture camps) motivations and relationships are always complex and usually confusing. 1984 is much more of a fairytale than “great literature”; the latter requires sympathetic human characters. (For instance, compare with Shakespeare’s heroes and villains.) I think one of the reasons that 1984 and Animal Farm have been so enduring is that their simplicity allows people to ignore Orwell’s actual intentions or message. Down and Out in Paris and London and Homage to Catalonia are much more rewarding reading than 1984 or Animal Farm.
lolcraft 17y ago
The Quixote's prose is confusing and repetitive, but it is a great book. Why is style now more important than theme? And why the fuck is Joyce's Ulysses more important than 1984?

by xtho 17y ago

weaksauce 17y ago

There are few books that I read in which I say to myself "Man that is a well written piece of literature that could not benefit from a bit of editing" I think that 1984 was a good book, maybe even great, but I would not say that it did not get a little long in the tooth and repetitive near the end. Don't get me started on the dan brown novels and the male chauvinistic nature therein. I just don't get why he needed to include a clueless female character in every book he has written just to provide someone whom the main character can lecture condescendingly. BTW. this is coming from a guy who is not overly sensitive to female equality issues but was smacked in the face by them after reading the Da Vinci Code.

jacobolus 17y ago

More than that, his characters and societies in 1984 are so one-dimensional as to be completely unrealistic, and therefore frankly pretty boring. In the real world (even in the worst totalitarian dictatorship, or in e.g. prison torture camps) motivations and relationships are always complex and usually confusing. 1984 is much more of a fairytale than “great literature”; the latter requires sympathetic human characters. (For instance, compare with Shakespeare’s heroes and villains.) I think one of the reasons that 1984 and Animal Farm have been so enduring is that their simplicity allows people to ignore Orwell’s actual intentions or message. Down and Out in Paris and London and Homage to Catalonia are much more rewarding reading than 1984 or Animal Farm.

lolcraft 17y ago

The Quixote's prose is confusing and repetitive, but it is a great book. Why is style now more important than theme? And why the fuck is Joyce's Ulysses more important than 1984?