Throughout quite a few of the chapters that we have seen in part two, we see Winston and Julia rebelling against the party by carrying on an intimate relationship- intimate both physically and emotionally. This struck me as interesting as this type of relationship would have been the opposite of rebellion in Brave New World, as we see the main societal outliers of that book completely opposed to frequent sexual encounters and promiscuity.
However, the thing that both books’ society’s have in common is the absence of genuine love and affection, as well as the idea that no matter which way the society mandates “normalcy” (either promiscuity or lack of such), it still believes in some way that everybody really does belong to everyone else and that privacy must be the root of all evil. The idea that things like privacy by one’s self and privacy with another person are inherently wrong seems to almost corrupt the humanity of a person in a way. Both books, but 1984 especially, strives to break down all genuine human affection and emotion by means of constant surveillance and fear.
What does it say about humanity that “privacy” and “love” are the first things to go after society is inevitably taken over by a corrupted government? And how do these fit into how we think of dystopias? And if dystopias are just bred out of an utopian ideal gone wrong, why would the absence of emotion and alone time make us a better society to live in theoretically?
I believe that getting rid of alone time is to get rid of the chance to really think about what you believe in. It starts to take away everyone's individual beliefs, instead forcing them to agree with one another has they collectively make the same decisions. Emotion on the other hand is what often breeds discontent. It is what makes people unhappy with the system, and what gives people the courage to rise up against it. So getting rid of those things isn't necessarily a better society, just a more controlled and simplified one.
ReplyDeleteVery good question. I had to think about this a bit, especially your last question about absence of alone time. I suppose a *truly* ideal society allows one to exist at multiple "levels" -- you can be an individual with your own thoughts, you can be a couple in love, you can be a family, and you can be part of a community. But dystopia eliminates all but community, so there's no balance, perhaps?
ReplyDeleteI think that in a controlled society, it spreads to more than just a political and physical sense. I think that our ability to choose is one of the most essential parts of existing. In these societies, there needs to be a control over the ability to choose, or rather, control over what choices are made between, making it nearly impossible for an individual to choose without having immediate repercussions.
ReplyDelete