Summary/Response Essay: Peter Firchow’s Article Regarding George Orwell
Firchow, Peter. “Homage to George Orwell.” Midwest Quarterly 53.1 (2011): 77-94. Academic
Search Complete. Web. 7 Oct. 2012. According to the article “Homage to George Orwell” by Peter Firchow, George Orwell should be considered a literary genius for accomplishments comparable to those of other writers thought to be geniuses and characteristics unique to his writing style. Firchow argues against Lionel Trilling’s (“one of the most influential critics of the century”) explicit claim that Orwell is not a genius with insight into his lifestyle, his unique viewpoint, and even his limitations that set him apart from other writers that Trilling labels as geniuses. (77) The first point Firchow makes in defending George Orwell’s intellect is the major distribution and collection of his work. He points out that there are numerous compilations of Orwell’s work, put together by his wife and others. This is compared to the fact that the same could said about many “great (dead) writers of genius.” (77) Even with “Orwell’s explicit death-bed prohibition against anyone producing any biography of him whatsoever,” biographies have been writing of him. It is noted that literally all of his work, from novels to small reviews, are still being produced today, and that even writers that Trilling does consider to have a genius intellect don’t have complete editions of their work. (78) In the next phase of the article, Firchow attempts to switch perspectives and put more focus on what separates Orwell from other proclaimed literary geniuses, starting off with the seriousness he portrays in all of his writing. According to the article, Orwell didn’t much include references to modern culture. In fact, he seems to have very rarely even acknowledged the existence of popular artists of his time (in painting and music). He makes no mention of the ever-growing television or movies, and only talks of radio on in regard to his work at BBC. He was, apparently at one point, interested in
Search Complete. Web. 7 Oct. 2012. According to the article “Homage to George Orwell” by Peter Firchow, George Orwell should be considered a literary genius for accomplishments comparable to those of other writers thought to be geniuses and characteristics unique to his writing style. Firchow argues against Lionel Trilling’s (“one of the most influential critics of the century”) explicit claim that Orwell is not a genius with insight into his lifestyle, his unique viewpoint, and even his limitations that set him apart from other writers that Trilling labels as geniuses. (77) The first point Firchow makes in defending George Orwell’s intellect is the major distribution and collection of his work. He points out that there are numerous compilations of Orwell’s work, put together by his wife and others. This is compared to the fact that the same could said about many “great (dead) writers of genius.” (77) Even with “Orwell’s explicit death-bed prohibition against anyone producing any biography of him whatsoever,” biographies have been writing of him. It is noted that literally all of his work, from novels to small reviews, are still being produced today, and that even writers that Trilling does consider to have a genius intellect don’t have complete editions of their work. (78) In the next phase of the article, Firchow attempts to switch perspectives and put more focus on what separates Orwell from other proclaimed literary geniuses, starting off with the seriousness he portrays in all of his writing. According to the article, Orwell didn’t much include references to modern culture. In fact, he seems to have very rarely even acknowledged the existence of popular artists of his time (in painting and music). He makes no mention of the ever-growing television or movies, and only talks of radio on in regard to his work at BBC. He was, apparently at one point, interested in