Deeper Questions, Part 1: Why Did I Read "1984", Anyway?

            This summer, I chose to read George Orwell's 1984. I did this for various reasons, including past positive experiences with Orwell's writings and the presumably worthwhile nature of its contents, but mostly because I could no longer reconcile its likely high quality and reasonable length with my not having read it yet. I certainly knew about it before I saw it as a choice on the summer reading list, since it has become a cultural icon and the source for a variety of figures of speech; it is nearly impossible to read anything about government surveillance or invasion of privacy without seeing the term “Big Brother” thrown about, usually with a stiff measure of doom and foreboding. In reading 1984, I sought to expand my understanding of human nature while reading something of substance, something that would make me think for a while after I finished. In all, I believe that I was successful in my mission.

            Orwell very effectively sets up a nervous, claustrophobic setting. His characters seem to always be on edge, in constant fear of the autocratic government "vaporizing" them, never to be seen again. Winston Smith, the main character, can never be sure of who or what to trust; he know that the information fed to him by the government is exclusively manufactured lies, in part because he works in the government division responsible for rewriting history for political ends. A main theme of 1984 is the nature of trust and the absence of trust. At the start of the novel, Winston believes that a woman working in the government fiction department is an agent trying to do him in, while he suspects that one of the senior officials in his own department is secretly a member of the resistance. Ironically, the situation is revealed to be the opposite of what Winston believes; the woman, named Julia, ultimately becomes Winston’s lover and fellow conspirer, while O’Brien, the senior official, ultimately betrays Winston. When he finally acquires a copy of the near-legendary Book, rumored to be authored by an elusive network of insurgents, Winston engrosses himself with its far more honest and rebellious contents. The mood of the story shifts as he reads, becoming more hopeful and brighter, hinting that the seemingly invincible government can in fact be overthrown.

            However, in the theme of deception and uncertainty, the Thought Police find and arrest Winston. It is revealed that their agents had been tracking him for the previous few months, and that The Book was in truth authored by the establishment as a way to deceive potential rebels. There is no organized rebellion; all of Winston’s rebel contacts were government agents tasked with bringing in those with goals counter to the interests of the state. Winston is hauled off to the depths of the government torture facility for re-education, marking the beginning of the dark decline of an already dark plot. I found this portion of the story particularly effective, as I had been considering the implications of The Book being a government anti-rebellion tool, and had come to the conclusion that it was a legitimate underground work just before I reached this turning point.

            After I finished 1984, I spent some time thinking about what Orwell’s message was. I believe that it is a sign of good literature if my interpretation of the book’s meaning is different from the majority, as it shows that I have understood the book on a deeper level than most other pieces of literature. My summer reading was a positive, enlightening experience, a unique experience in an age where traditional literature has fallen by the wayside.