The Failure Of Power In George Orwell's 1984
In 1984, Orwell asserts that knowledge of the truth grants power and thus must be both feared and valued. Whilst knowledge can be used to seize dominance over a population, which Orwell warns against, it can also be used to attain control over oneself; personal freedom. The threats to acquiring true knowledge, whether it be the control of information by the corrupt, the curtailment of independent thought, or apathy, must be fought against to avoid the surrender of liberty.
Through the exploration of the Party’s control and manipulation of information to assert power over its constituents, Orwell condemns this capability whilst privileging the role of empirical knowledge in combatting this threat. Orwell forewarns that governments empowered …show more content…
Employing a simile in describing Julia’s evasion of the Party as akin to how “a rabbit dodges a dog”, coupled with her characterisation as “only a rebel from the waist downwards”, Orwell asserts that apathy and tacit acts of rebellion should be feared because they fail to prevent the perpetuation of governmental abuse of power. Moreover, having been born post-revolution, Julia has no knowledge of a different Oceania and is thus bereft of the ability to perpetuate true rebellion. Orwell condemns her apathetic attitude and tolerance of the Party as “something unalterable, like the sky” by employing an analogy that she “simply swallowed everything … just as a grain of corn will pass undigested through the body of a bird”. Conversely, through Winston’s defiance of the Party doctrine and his expression of independent thought, he rebels not only for himself but “for the future, for the unborn”. Winston maintains his rebellion despite a seemingly imminent death, foreshadowed using metaphorical language to describe Winston as “a lonely ghost uttering a truth that nobody would ever hear”, and hence, Orwell privileges Winston’s selfless and insurgent attitude in fighting for personal freedom and the ability to articulate it. Therefore, Orwell positions the audience to fear political apathy for its contribution to the preservation of power for totalitarian regimes and thus the demise of freedom, whilst suggesting that the ability to articulate rebellion must
Through the exploration of the Party’s control and manipulation of information to assert power over its constituents, Orwell condemns this capability whilst privileging the role of empirical knowledge in combatting this threat. Orwell forewarns that governments empowered …show more content…
Employing a simile in describing Julia’s evasion of the Party as akin to how “a rabbit dodges a dog”, coupled with her characterisation as “only a rebel from the waist downwards”, Orwell asserts that apathy and tacit acts of rebellion should be feared because they fail to prevent the perpetuation of governmental abuse of power. Moreover, having been born post-revolution, Julia has no knowledge of a different Oceania and is thus bereft of the ability to perpetuate true rebellion. Orwell condemns her apathetic attitude and tolerance of the Party as “something unalterable, like the sky” by employing an analogy that she “simply swallowed everything … just as a grain of corn will pass undigested through the body of a bird”. Conversely, through Winston’s defiance of the Party doctrine and his expression of independent thought, he rebels not only for himself but “for the future, for the unborn”. Winston maintains his rebellion despite a seemingly imminent death, foreshadowed using metaphorical language to describe Winston as “a lonely ghost uttering a truth that nobody would ever hear”, and hence, Orwell privileges Winston’s selfless and insurgent attitude in fighting for personal freedom and the ability to articulate it. Therefore, Orwell positions the audience to fear political apathy for its contribution to the preservation of power for totalitarian regimes and thus the demise of freedom, whilst suggesting that the ability to articulate rebellion must