3 ms·
I think Orwell's fame is totally unrelated to these 6 rules — 5 rules, since the last one is just a warning that rules about style should not be absolute. Why
by idoubtit 4y ago
I think Orwell's fame is totally unrelated to these 6 rules — 5 rules, since the last one is just a warning that rules about style should not be absolute.
Why is 1984 so acclaimed? Its style is boring and unimaginative. The characters' psychology is exaggerated and totally unbelievable (I remember the scene in the cinema at the beginning at the book, and, at the end of the book, the absurd post-torture behaviour). A large part of the story was ripped off Zamyatin. Some parts of the story are okay, but other parts are ridiculous... When I read that the nice old librarian was in fact the young chief of the counter-intelligence service, disguised in order to catch dissidents, I burst out laughing: imagine Beria tailing dissidents in the street, or Edgar Hoover disguised as a plumber to install illegal wire-tapes!
Orwell's crude style and stories are perfectly fine for a grotesque parody like Animal Farm. But I can't think of 1984 as a good book, not even close. I suppose it was successful because propaganda likes crude style and stupid stories, and 1984 was largely seen as a propaganda tool.
- Melatonic 4y agoI think what you mean here is that 1984 is not prosaic - the diction Orwell has used is intentionally crude like you say. If someone ever writes a new age dystopian novel that is similar I would personally love it if the wakeup phrase (or whatever you call it) for the indoctrinated masses is simply: Prose are Powerful.