During the Soviet Union the people were oppressed. Neighbors were sent to spy on their neighbors. Sisters were sent to spy on their brothers and mothers on their daughters. This caused a lot of doubt among the people and made them choose who to trust very carefully. This is similar to the struggle Oceanians have to face. However the children of the Soviet Union were always the ones that were not affected by the influence of the government. They were also the ones that came up with the ideas of revolution and change. If the children would have been monitored more closely would this have prevented the idea of a revolution in the Soviet Union? Furthermore in the Soviet Union it was common to live in small, grey, always alike apartments which Oceania and the USSR share in common. How would such a surrounding/ atmosphere impact the people and the mind and how does this benefit the government? I personally find it extremely fascinating how, unlike Oceanian citizens, the oppression and control bonded the people of the USSR having them understand that they can only depend on each other and that by helping others they will help them in return. It has caused people to rely more on each other and bonded the nation. Why is this the opposite in Oceania? Finally literature, music and art played an important role in the Soviet Union. A person that was involved in music, literature or dance was always someone that the others respected greatly. Most importantly out of the arts was ballet, it was always said that one could tell the political situation of the nation just by watching the ballet that was broadcasted on all channels. Of course every art, literature and music piece was sent to the department of art in Moscow that would give the permission for use. Why would Orwell eliminate this aspect in Oceania?
I don't think linking history to this book is a good idea as it will influence our opinion and we will try to compare elements. I do agree to a certain extend that there are lots of similarities. Orwell would eliminate the art aspect of Oceania as his book is not necessarily in relation with the Soviet union, there might be some points in common but we know for sure that his world is a way harsher version, a dystopia simply. I truly discourage reading 1984 with a comparison to the soviet union in mind; it is beyond the goal of fiction.
ReplyDeleteI like the comparisons you made and agree with you on the point that both the USSR and Oceania in theory have more or less the same objective, being to control its people while feigning a socialist structure of society. However, I feel that what's even more important to consider is the differences, not the parallels, between the two systems and to look at why Oceania prevails while the USSR has evidently not worked out and existed only for a relatively short length of time.
ReplyDeleteI guess this only really came clear to me after reading the excerpts from "the book", but the real difference between the two is doublethink. As shown through your example of the children in the USSR, the Soviets never succeeded at controlling its peoples' minds, and make them adapt to the technique of doublethink. That's after all what the book preaches: That Ingsoc (or the other 2 doctrines from Eurasia and Eastasia) only work out because its people are able to accept two versions of reality at the same time while not realizing the process of doing so. The "blackwhite" that's involved in the process fundamentally makes the Party on one hand all mighty but also never questioned.
Given that the USSR did not last, the fact that the children of the USSR were not committing to the doublethink principle seems like the perfect proof to Ingsoc.