The Bowie Book Club discussion

Please, mind the book part you are commenting on in order to avoid spoilers.

I am almost done with Part I and I have grown obsessed with all the Oldspeak x Newspeak content...

How is everyone's reading going?!

Sarah, I haven't started reading it yet, but I remember feeling exactly the same way you do now, when I read it before. The atmosphere would give any normal person the creeps, be he/she young or old. I want to read it again, but at the same time, I don't.

Sarah, Samanta, I have been putting it off, like for 4 days now, because I am dreading the darkness of the book. I will definitely start it today.
The poll for the reading of next month is not closed yet. There is still hope for a lighter read :-D

Cynthia wrote: "Sarah, Samanta, I have been putting it off, like for 4 days now, because I am dreading the darkness of the book. "

Me too!

I understand what everyone is saying, and I hesitated for longer than usual to dive in the reading. As it is a rereading for me, as well, I still have the idea of thinking "so we are doomed" once I finished the book the first time. Now that I am more mature and less extremist than I was in my teenage years, I have been reading it slowly, trying to track all details and small clues that could have lead to a different outcome.

When you grow older you learn to relativise the world you live in. But your lucidity gets sharper as well and your disillusions only get greater. So you also learn to live with the way things are because you have to if you want to live.

Think about Orwell, he was only 47 years old when he died...

Hello dear Members of the Bowie Book Club,

It's been four weeks now that David Bowie is riding amongst the stars...

Just wondering how you are keeping up with our February reading?

Just for fun: the original review of Nineteen Eighty-Four in TIME (dates back to 1949), entitled "Where the Rainbow Ends".
http://time.com/vault/issue/1949-06-2...
http://time.com/vault/issue/1949-06-2...

Cynthia

Lidiana wrote: "I am almost done with Part I and I have grown obsessed with all the Oldspeak x Newspeak content... "

I began last night. First chapter done.
I can't wait to continue reading it. It is amazing.
I just read a glimpse of Oldspeak, Newspeak with Ministry of Truth, Minitrue. But I could not help thinking at what was said after the Charlie Hebdo attacks, about the killers. Some sociologists and linguists pointed out at the lexical poverty of the killers. They said that it was easy to indoctrinate them at some point in their lives because they were severely lacking vocabulary. I believe they are right. Orwell shows that if you limit vocabulary, you limit freedom of thought and freedom of speech.
Charlie Hebdo is mostly known for its cartoons (sometimes shocking ones, but they are always taken out of their context, which does not help). But it is less known for its outstanding quality of writing.

Cynthia wrote: "But I could not help thinking at what was said after the Charlie Hebdo attacks, about the killers. Some sociologists and linguists pointed out at the lexical poverty of the killers."

A fascinating reflection, Cynthia. I would love to read more on the topic, if you have anything to share. The whole matter of linguistics and how language is treated as a weapon in 1984 is definitely one of the topics that has intrigued me the most so far.

As I have said many times, I am rereading the book. I read it for the first time when I was around 13 years old and I thought it was just ok. For me it sounded just like another sci-fi book. Now, rereading it, I am certain that I didn't have the experience necessary to understand its deeper messages.

There was a passage (but if I am not mistaken was in Part II) that says pretty much what you summarized with "Orwell shows that if you limit vocabulary, you limit freedom of thought and freedom of speech." I'll try to find it...

I'm currently reading the passage where his philologist "friend", Syme, explains his work to Winston.

It begins with "small talk" about a public hanging on the day before (not a working day presumably a Sunday) that its perversity gave me chills: "It was a good hanging", said Syme reminiscently, "I think it spoils it when they tie their feet together. I like to see them kicking. And above all, (...)". I'd leave the rest of the quote out because it is gross but it gives you a brief but powerful depiction of the main traits of this character. Syme is "red light" (be careful, Winston!).

Syme goes on about Newspeak : "It's a beautiful thing, the destruction of words."

"Don't you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought?"

Brrr, chills.

I've just finished the first part, and I have to say that I really liked it. It is so easy to read, the text flows really well.

I was really interest in this first part, in which Orwell creates and present's us this new world. The ministries and how the society is allways under surveillance, it's fascinating. It got really interesting in thinking that he wrote that after the end of the WWII, and how the spectrum of totalitarian regimes were hauting europe all over.

Cynthia wrote: "I'm currently reading the passage where his philologist "friend", Syme, explains his work to Winston.

It begins with "small talk" about a public hanging on the day before (not a working day presu..."


Reminds me of public hangings from old times. It was a public event full of audience and it was a special occasion, with a lot of fans, like a concert today. Human beings are disgusting sometimes. :(

Pedro wrote: "I've just finished the first part, and I have to say that I really liked it. It is so easy to read, the text flows really well.

I was really interest in this first part, in which Orwell creates an..."
Yes, Pedro. The banners, the slogans, the huge picture of bb hanging the the hall of the building, the constant modifying of information (propaganda), the pointing out of a common enemy who is responsible for everything that goes wrong (Goldstein, that's a Jewish German name) and the kids being more hateful than the adults (so Hitler Jugend). All this reminds me of Nazi Germany.

Cynthia wrote: "Pedro wrote: "I've just finished the first part, and I have to say that I really liked it. It is so easy to read, the text flows really well.

I was really interest in this first part, in which Orw..."

The part where he describes the relationship between children and parents, and how children aren't actually children, but mini-spies creeped me out...

I'm towards the end of chapter 5. I've also been especially fascinated by the discussion of Newspeak, as well as the manipulation of information, statistics, etc. in order to create a hermetically sealed "truth" that can't be disputed in the service of establishing an all-powerful orthodoxy.

And this poverty of language connected to the power of orthodoxy isn't just limited to totalitarian systems like the ones Orwell was critiquing -- as mentioned above, there's plenty of evidence of this dynamic today, in religious and political extremists of varying types, as well as (I would argue) in the media outlets that propagandize on their behalf.

That said, the overwhelming comparison I keep thinking of is to North Korea, where virtually all language and experiences are directed to the cult of the leader/state, in a way that approaches near-totality to a degree that was never achieved under Stalin in the Soviet Union, or Hitler in Nazi Germany (e.g., Dostoevsky and Goethe were still widely read and honored in their native countries).

Anyway, I find it's far more gripping (and chilling) than when I read it at the age of 15! There are just some things that are lost on youth, I guess. ;)

I'm slowly getting the feeling that I'm the youngest member of this group :)

Han wrote: "I'm slowly getting the feeling that I'm the youngest member of this group :)"

Why do you say that, Han?

Lidiana wrote: "The part where he describes the relationship between children and parents, and how children aren't actually children, but mini-spies creeped me out... "

Totally...

Lidiana wrote: "Han wrote: "I'm slowly getting the feeling that I'm the youngest member of this group :)"

Why do you say that, Han?"

Slightly off topic, I know - but what with everyone saying how they see the book differently now than when they read it at school - I'm still in school, which makes me wonder how I'll view it if I read it again in another twenty or thirty years.

Han wrote: "Lidiana wrote: "Han wrote: "I'm slowly getting the feeling that I'm the youngest member of this group :)"

Why do you say that, Han?"

Slightly off topic, I know - but what with everyone saying how..."

I suppose we can make the comparison in the thread about Part III of the book, in order not to spoil it to those who haven't read it yet.

Just finished Part 1. This is a "re-read" for me as well, even though I never finished it the first time around. Honestly, I'm still finding it a chore to read - it's a very dark story.

I have two points I'd like to bring up. First, given the desexualization of society, and unpleasantness of having children (to those of you who've pointed out how creepy it is raising little would-be spies), I would think that people would just stop getting married and having kids. And wouldn't that eventually bring about the collapse of the party?

And second, I'm surprised no one has compared Newspeak to the shorthand people use when texting. Although I understand the convenience, I can't help worrying that texting shorthand will become society's default written language at some point.

Finally started the book. I remember the general idea of the book from before, but the details eluded me. Also, I borrowed my copy from the library and it's missing the first two pages (WHY DO PEOPLE DO THAT?!?!)

Anyway, the synopsis of the book on the cover says: "The year 1984 has come and gone, but George Orwell's prophetic, nightmarish vision in 1949 of the world we wewre becoming is timelier than ever."

When I read the three slogans of the Party,
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH,
it struck me how, whoever wrote the synopsis, was totally right. We actually are that world, but here the ideas are not so openly said and promoted, but they are achieved undercover of selective news shared by media, laws approved that actually take freedom away, while saying it's for greater good, war fought to "preserve" peace, and so forth. People have become like sheep (no offense to the sheep) and listen to and BELIEVE whatever they hear instead of using their own brains and thinking for themselves. When Winston described the Two Minutes Hate and the reaction of people, it reminded me how we are so easily misled by what is presented to us through media and our leaders.


Also, when Winston tried to write a diary and wanted to use pen and paper just for the kicks of it, it reminded me how we don't use paper and pen today so much. The art of writing letters is almost extinct. Instead, we use our phones to type fast or record something. If we continue like that we will forget how to write letters.

"The pen was an archaic instrument, seldom used even for signatures, and he had procured one, furtively and with some difficulty, simply because of a feeling that the beautiful creamy paper deserved to be written on with a real nib instead of being scratched with an ink pencil. Actually he was not used to writing by hand. Apart from very short notes, it was usual to dictate everything into speakwrite...."

This is only the first 30 pages. I wonder what awaits me next. :D

Adriana wrote: "Just finished Part 1. This is a "re-read" for me as well, even though I never finished it the first time around. Honestly, I'm still finding it a chore to read - it's a very dark story.

I have two..."

This is true, Adriana. Women are desexualised. In Nazi Germany, women were praised for their motherhood. A good Aryan woman would bear many children and raised them to become "good Aryans and serve the Fuhrer".
Nevertheless, I don't think that people want to get rid of the Party. I haven't seen much resistance yet, except some in Winston's head (but I'm only on page 74).

Of, yes, we do have some Newspeak nowadays. You're right and people have forgotten how to write correctly by always shortening words and speed writing. I'm old fashioned school, I write my messaging and text posts in full :-)

Samanta wrote: "Finally started the book. I remember the general idea of the book from before, but the details eluded me. Also, I borrowed my copy from the library and it's missing the first two pages (WHY DO PEOP..."

Incredible how Orwell predicted we would hardly use pen and paper in the future... I am always appalled when I read in the media that a school adopted iPads to teach children how to write.
Same could be applied to reading, I presume, the human brain processes information differently when we read a paper book or a ebook. Guess which one is the winner impacting long-term memory? (which is very relevant for students having to memorise scores of pages).

AI is there and electronics has evolved but biology hasn't. We are still exactly the same as those cavemen 150 000 years ago.

Lidiana wrote: "Han wrote: "Lidiana wrote: "Han wrote: "I'm slowly getting the feeling that I'm the youngest member of this group :)"

Why do you say that, Han?"

Slightly off topic, I know - but what with everyon..."

Adriana, I was thinking that during the whole book, regarding newspeak and texting nowadays, specially afterwords ar the appendix, but it has some difference...
language evolves in such different ways from time and place. Thinking in the time and place where Orwell wrote the book, I would think of it less in a sense of evolution of language and more of a form of imperialism, in which the Party controls its citizens.
When Orwell was writing the book, we had a series of colonial events and independence forces fighting for liberty.
India itself, where he was born, was a brittish colony, and they tried to force English into its citizens as a form of control (besides internet-conspiracy theories, I don't see that much happening with texts.. Idk...)

At last, I've finished Part One. The account of the Revolution and its aftermath was very interesting. The purges refer to how Stalin got rid of all his comrades at the Party.
Up to now, I see so many references to Nazism and to Stalinism.
BB, at the beginning of the novel, was Hitler himself. Now, he's become Stalin.

It is harrowing to read that people cannot remember how it was "before" (the ol' man at the ba'). How his memory can only recall trivial facts and not important ideas.

The passage where Winston meets the owner of the little shop gave me a feeling of relief. At last, there is a place where one can go back in time, where there's a sense of normality.

But I guess something bad will happen to this place and its owner... :-(