/lit/ - Literature

>>17777410
If you're in the mood for another dystopia, this time one with some nuance, try Brave New World next.
It's 100% better than 1984 btw.

>>17777428
I have ordered trainspotting (rewatched the movie), but I will order that next. Thank you

>>17777410
Animal Farm might have been better as a prelude to this one, but idk I never read it. Give it a shot, its short.

Also, Pink Floyd nailed the adaptation.

>>17777428
This is good too. Really it should go:
>BNW
>AF
>1984

>>17777410
Great and yes you should try Animal Farm next

>>17777410
came here to say this >>17777428
On the last chapter of BNW now and I can confirm it's better than 1984 from a literary standpoint. They are similar in someone ways and different in others but, the biggest thing about BNW compared to 1984 is that there are actually characters and way less exposition after you get passed the first couple of chapters.

>>17777901
Why BNW first?

Call of the Crocodile by F. Gardner.

>>17778157

Will read all the books guys, thanks for chiming in

>>17777410
How the hell could you possibly have enjoyed reading that nonsensical Goldman book except in the middle?
I read it recently and at least 20% of the length could have been cut to no detriment.

>>17777410
read brave new world and fahrenheit 451

Animal Farm is even better than 1984, if nothing else because it's leaner.

Pic related is at the top of my reading list. People always talk about 1984, Brave New World and We as a thematic trilogy from the 20th century, but WE was written significantly earlier than 1984 or BNW, and in the earlier Soviet context. That's about all I know right now, but it seems to have gotten dropped from the whole trilogy hype.

underrated bookino

>>17779340
Pic related is crazy good.

>>17777410
Yo have to be over 18 years old to use this website.

Animal farm is awful, and I say that as someone who really likes Orwell. Try Homage to Catalonia or Down and Out instead. His journalism and essays are also really good.

>>17779300
I’m not OP but I enjoyed Goldsteins excerpt and I didn’t find it nonsensical. The excerpt gave needed exposition into the world. It also explained in great length the purpose of war in keeping a caste based society, of serfs ruled by the elite. Also the power of propaganda and doublethink. There is a similar section in the later parts of BNW, where Huxley when Bernard and another character are captured they are brought to some man (forgive me for it’s a long time since I’ve read the book) but to summarise they are told by this, they are told the details of how the society operates and why it operates.

Main difference between 1984 and BNW, is BNW deprives us of what makes us human through pleasure and 1984 through pain. They still end up with the same result, people are soulless husks of what they should be though.

>>17777410
Read Homage to Catalonia

>>17779300
>How the hell could you possibly have enjoyed reading that nonsensical Goldman book except in the middle?
Not OP, it wasn't nonsensical, it provided great exposition into Orwell's world. The excerpt goes into detail about how the Party uses endless war to control the population through fear and poverty, the manipulation of history, and the threat of the Thought Police to control the population.
>I read it recently and at least 20% of the length could have been cut to no detriment.
I think it served its purpose, which was for Orwell to explain the details of how totalitarianism exists. Similarly Huxley wrote a good chapter in BNW, chapter XIV, which serves the same purposes as Goldstein's book however I do agree that it was better executed. Before Bernard and Helmholtz are expelled from society the controller explains in great detail the functions are purpose behind BNW society, and I found it to be one of the most compelling parts of the book.

>>17777410
The best Orwell book is
>Homage to Catalonia
&
>Road to Wigan Pier

Also check out Chris Hitchens book
>Why Orwell Matters

>>17779388
I appreciate your perspective on this. I tend to resent worldbuilding, so I try to look for a reason other than explanation for passages like that to be included, and in this case, it seemed to exemplify the insidiousness of "doublethink" in media. For example, on one page Goldstein would say "It was clear that an all-around increase in wealth threatened the destruction-indeed, in some sense was the destruction-of a hierarchical society," and then, on the very next page, "Physical facts could not be ignored. In philosophy, or religion, or ethics, or politics, two and two might make five, but when one was designing a gun or an airplane they had to make four. Inefficient nations were always conquered sooner or later, and the struggle for efficiency was inimical to illusions." The ideas aren't completely unrelated, but they don't quite fit cleanly together. It's like looking at the world through a fractured lens.

It became hypnotic over time, but it seemed to happen so regularly that it couldn't have been accidental... By the end of the section, he changes footing every paragraph or so.

There are also plot reasons we find out at the end of the section for why the truth of the book should definitely be questioned, but that's for sure up to interpretation.

Maybe I'm trying to be too charitable to Orwell. If it really was just worldbuilding, I'd say it's a bulky and contrived device... Fine if you liked it, but wew, frustrating for me.

>>17779472
I guess, but it really seems like Orwell probably had something more in mind than exposition. Like, I mentioned before, he literally gives us plot reasons to question the accuracy of the account.
If you take for granted that the book is a fabrication, the protagonist's desperation for it to be true hits with more irony. It also supports what Orwell is saying about how all readers are vulnerable to bad journalism, even if that reader is a journalist himself. Wouldn't it be nice to think that the hero can see through all the fake news? Kind of antithetical if the book is actually a faithful retelling.

Don't forget that Orwell was wrestling with intense inner conflict re: coverage of the soviet union

>>17779521
This anon here >>17779472
Deleted my previous commenting as I'd made a lot of mistakes. This is why you proof read.

>insidiousness of "doublethink" in media.
Exactly, which is why I love the excerpt. See pic related. One of my favorite parts from the book is "sanity is not statistical", which is explained well through the world building.

>"It was clear that an all-around increase in wealth threatened the destruction-indeed, in some sense was the destruction-of a hierarchical society,"
> "Physical facts could not be ignored. In philosophy, or religion, or ethics, or politics, two and two might make five, but when one was designing a gun or an airplane they had to make four. Inefficient nations were always conquered sooner or later, and the struggle for efficiency was inimical to illusions."
If I recall correctly, here Orwell is talking about the world previous to Oceania, Eurasia and Eastasia were locked into a stalemate. So it might not match exactly onto what Orwell talks about later in that chapter.

>The ideas aren't completely unrelated, but they don't quite fit cleanly together. It's like looking at the world through a fractured lens.
Perhaps this is intentional, as we see the world through Winston's eyes, and the lens through which he see things can easily be described as fractured.

>There are also plot reasons we find out at the end of the section for why the truth of the book should definitely be questioned
It would defeat the purpose of the book, to take away after reading it that it shouldn't be questioned.

> If it really was just worldbuilding, I'd say it's a bulky and contrived device.
Maybe its contrived, but could you have came up with a better way to explain those ideas through the plot of 1984.
> Fine if you liked it, but wew, frustrating for me.
I enjoyed it. As the book says

>"Chapter 1 like chapter 3, had not actually told him anything that he did not know, it had merely systematized the knowledge that he possessed already"

I felt at this point of the book systematization was needed and I was glad when it came.

>>17779604
>>Deleted my previous commenting
>This is why you proof read.
And yet I never do.
*comment

>Wouldn't it be nice to think that the hero can see through all the fake news? Kind of antithetical if the book is actually a faithful retelling.
Yes but that's the point, hence "sanity is not statistical", made a post here >>17779493

>I believe that what makes Dystopia's terrifying is how they brainwash the population and get inside the characters heads.
The point is that Winston doesn't know what is real, what is right or wrong, what to believe. I only think its right for Orwell to put doubt in the reader as well to whether or not there is a resistance, as there is too doubt in Winston.
That's why once the book is finished you have to question its message for yourself.
>It would defeat the purpose of the book, to take away after reading it that it shouldn't be questioned.

1984 is about the human soul and sanity in the face of misery, insanity and torment.

any tips on performing doublethink day in, day out without losing my fucking mind?
I have a friend who now wants me to refer to them as a woman despite the fact that for 23 years of my life they were a male.

>>17779652
>any tips on performing doublethink day in, day out without losing my fucking mind?
The whole point is that doublethink IS insanity

>>17779656
Okay but I have to perform it everyday regardless of that fact, so if there's any way to do so that limits damage to my psyche I would love to hear it. Obviously the trans friend is only one example, there are numerous more.

>>17779668
>>17779652
> I have a friend who now wants me to refer to them as a woman despite the fact that for 23 years of my life they were a male.
If you’ve been his friend for that long you have an obligation to try and fix his insanity. Be a good friend and show him that he’s retarded.

>>17779668
> Obviously the trans friend is only one example, there are numerous more.
List them. Also lying isn’t doublethink, doublethink is only necessitated when you are recording every moment of your life and in your sleep. If you slip up you will taking away by the police and tortured. Lucky for you, you can make die with just lying like the rest of us.

>>17779604
Yeah, interesting. I don't think I disagree with anything you've said. I just think that section could have been a page and a half long and I'd have gotten the idea without feeling my brain go flaccid ha
I guess it's a neat trick that he put us in exactly the same amount of darkness about the world Winston lives in. It definitely has an emotional impact, regardless of whether or not I agree with the pacing.

>1984 is about the human soul and sanity in the face of misery, insanity and torment.
okay, deepthought, but that doesn't really extract anything useful from the text. it's also about how information manipulation works, from the perspective of a journalist.

>>17779652
pronouns are rohypnol.

>>17779668
>Obviously the trans friend is only one example, there are numerous more.

List them. Also lying isn’t doublethink, doublethink is only necessitated when you are recorded every moment of your entire life and in your sleep. If you slip up you will taking away by the police and tortured. Lucky for you, you can make due with just lying like the rest of us.

>>17779652
Your friend is experiencing something that in many ways resembles schizophrenia. Think of your trans friend the same way you would treat someone whose prone to schizo delusions. You wouldn't get very far trying to explain to a schizo that no, the carbonation in their soda is not evidence that mk ultra coka cola demons are trying to poison them, right?

Like at the end of the novel, Winston and his gf both know that the government is run by lying scumbags, but going on about it to each other isn't going to change anything.

You don't have to succumb totally to the TRA propaganda like Winston would, but you can have sympathy for the mentally disabled, right? I mean, you are browsing 4chan...

>>17779652
If you're actually a friend you'll do right by them and not play into they're delusions. Tell him the truth, he cuts you out of his life so be it. You'll be better of for it.

>>17779734
>but you can have sympathy for the mentally disabled, right?
sympathy alone doesn't help anybody

>>17779780
is it sick if this webm makes me laugh every time

>>17779686
>okay, deepthought, but that doesn't really extract anything useful from the text. it's also about how information manipulation works, from the perspective of a journalist.
It might not extract anything out of Goldsteins book, but its what I took away from the book as a whole.

>>17779780
If it was a kid, I'd agree fully. Is there any hope for adults who fall into the cult?

>>17779783
>is it sick if this webm makes me laugh every time
No, that reaction means you're healthy

>>17779790
>If it was a kid, I'd agree fully. Is there any hope for adults who fall into the cult?
Yes, if people don't play into their illusions
The issue is transsexuals are used to push a political ideology, by destroying what it means to be a man and a woman. At the expense of transsexuals who are already mentally unstable, the most loving act you could do is not lie to them. They're in need of compassion and truth, as they're attacked from all angles.

>>17779472
>Chris Hitchens

>>17779832
Yeah so what faggot

What you gonna do about it?

>>17779835
laugh

>>17777410
Read Brave New World by Huxley. It is way better and more interesting than 1984.

>>17779849
What’s wrong with Christopher Hitchens?

I think brave new world is better but 1984 is much darker and scarier. I couldn't keep going last time I tried reading it, it was giving me too much anxiety.