NationStates Jolt Archive

Alright, I finished George Orwell's Animal Farm about a week ago, and just this weekend finished 1984. I pose a question: Do you think Animal Farm and 1984 present a correct picture of what it's like in Soviet Russia and other Communist areas like that? I'd like to hear what other people who have read one or both books think about them. I was very intrested by the concept of "doublethink" and the slogans:
"War is Peace"
"Slavery is Freedom"
"Ignorance is Strength"
Note: If you have not read either of these books, do not participate in the discussion!

1984 is my fave book

and do you want my real answer?

I think it not so much represents Russia but America...

and dont ask me to explain...well maybe ask me tomorrow...im tired and emotional :cool:

The sad part is, I think you're right. It's more of a picture if America then Russia.

Mmmmm... No. (to the OP, that is...)

Well, I'm not an expert on Russian history by any means, but I'm pretty sure that the USSR wasn't populated primarily by talking animals.

Let me see.

"In Soviet Russia, animals own YOU!"

Yes.

I think it not so much represents Russia but America...

You're joking right?

As for my response, I think 1984 and Animal Farms have actually different governments. Although both highly authoritarian, so yes I think it represents Stalins rule well in some respects (not Lenins (although I'm not sayin Lenin was any good either)).

Well, I'm not an expert on Russian history by any means, but I'm pretty sure that the USSR wasn't populated primarily by talking animals.

Seems like you're right without hugely innacurate post.

1984 was what Orwell saw as potential totalitarianism rising in US and UK. Stuff in there is based from Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany, IIRC.

1984 was what Orwell saw as potential totalitarianism rising in US and UK. Stuff in there is based from Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany, IIRC.

Yeah, Animal Farm is a direct description of the formation of Soviet Russia, down to the Allied incursions (when the farmer comes back).

1984 ain't russia. and animal farm is fairly good, though its a little too trot to get it as good as it could.

Where is the "kinda" option?

Note: If you have not read either of these books, do not participate in the discussion!

This is NSG. You do not control who can and can not participate in a thread.

1984 ain't russia.


How?

How?

For starters, it takes place in England.

How?

It's more about fascism in the other direction (right), rather then Animal Farm which is more based on left totalitarianism.

1984 no. Animal Farm, yes. In 1984 O'Brien even claims that the Party is not like the USSR, insofar that the CPSU believed it was ruling for the people, and failed to realise it should take power for power's sake.

1984 ain't russia.

The soviet union was not Russia. it was Russia, Belarus, Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkenistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan.

It's more about fascism in the other direction (right), rather then Animal Farm which is more based on left totalitarianism.

Damn. Completely misread that.

:headbang:

Thought it said AF aint Russia.

The soviet union was not Russia. it was Russia, Belarus, Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkenistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan.

don't recall saying otherwise

Well, I never got around to reading 1984 but I read "Animal Farm" just recently. Obviously there were no talking animals in the USSR but I think it presents the gist of how society was in Stalin's Russia, or to a lesser extent Mao's China.

1984 was more about Totalitarianism in general than the Totalitarianism of the Soviet Union

As for Animal Farm, like Soviet Russia, the people (Animals) sought social and economic equality and an escape from the oppressive, and abusive Royalist and Capitalist Economic-Political structure of the early Tsars. However they did find their equality they were still oppressed by their new government, merely a trade off between the Corporate abuse of the Tsars to a Centralized Republic Governmental abuse.
"Some are more equal than others"

Alright, I finished George Orwell's Animal Farm about a week ago, and just this weekend finished 1984. I pose a question: Do you think Animal Farm and 1984 present a correct picture of what it's like in Soviet Russia and other Communist areas like that? I'd like to hear what other people who have read one or both books think about them. I was very intrested by the concept of "doublethink" and the slogans:
"War is Peace"
"Slavery is Freedom"
"Ignorance is Strength"
Note: If you have not read either of these books, do not participate in the discussion!

Animal farm can represent many aspects of the soviet union or quite easily maoist china. Although the story does not try to follow the history of the soviet union, many of the characters could easily represent individuals or groups within the union. The names of the characters escape me mostly now... Napolean as stalin, his rival, as trotsky. Old major/pig that dies early on as lenin. The farmer as the old regime. His return with re-enforcements as the white army, etc....

1984 does not represent the soviet union. But the danger of lost freedoms and the growth of totalitarian regimes. This combined with newer technology that allows people to controlled further and further.

You're joking right?



Well, the USSR never reached that level of intrusion and monitoring that citizens in most 1st world countries are subjet to these days.
Not saying that anybody acutally uses all that data, but when it comes to mere observation of private citizens, the West has left Russia far behind long, long ago.

Animal farm is definitly Soviet Russia.

I'd have to go with everyone else that 1984 is more of a fascist Western World thing.


Note: If you have not read either of these books, do not participate in the discussion! Sure BIG BROTHER!!!

I'm just adding to the chorus, but Animal Farm is definitely comparable to the Soviet Union. 1984, whilst it borrowed the cult of personality that Stalin used so infamously in the guise of 'big brother', isn't exactly a parable on the Soviet Union. It's an attack on totalitarian regimes, and oppressive governments that claim to work 'for the people'.

As previously said, both books are about totalitarian authoritative governments.

1984 is about fascist governments, a la Nazi Germany (except it was about the UK, US and what might happen).

Animal farm is about communist governments, a la Soviet Russia.

Ah. Yes, 1984 IS more about totalitarian society. I see my mistake has been analysed, then taken roughly and brutaly beat down into the dust. Also, my insistance on people having read the book(s) is that I would like to have people who know what they are talking about. Apperently, I am not one of them.

....
Telescreen? What telescreen?

The sad part is, I think you're right. It's more of a picture if America then Russia.

Er... "Britain" my dear friend. Britain.

This has probably been said before, but Animal Farm is based off the Russian Revolution, so yes, it is a pretty accurate example of Soviet Russia. Of course you'd have to pick out all the correlations between what is happening on the farm and what is happening in the Soviet Union.

1984 was Orwell's idea of what the west (1984 takes place in England) would become if it continued down the path it had taken.

No. Animal Farm I haven't read though.

Alright, I finished George Orwell's Animal Farm about a week ago, and just this weekend finished 1984. I pose a question: Do you think Animal Farm and 1984 present a correct picture of what it's like in Soviet Russia and other Communist areas like that? I'd like to hear what other people who have read one or both books think about them. I was very intrested by the concept of "doublethink" and the slogans:
"War is Peace"
"Slavery is Freedom"
"Ignorance is Strength"
Note: If you have not read either of these books, do not participate in the discussion!

Not really. Anyone who wants to compare 1984 with Russia would have to note that the political state did not exist on its own, but as a component of a larger global system where all the elites agreed on the same method of controlling power. For Oceania to equal Russia, the Western World would have had to equal East Asia or whatever the heck the names of those other two countries were. Otherwise, you're going to have a hell of time finding parallels within the story to things like Pope John Paul II, Solidarity in Poland,
the Czech uprisings in '68, etc.

As for animal farm, it's been 10 years; I don't really remember. I suspect it's a fairly close analogy, but I also suspect Orwell's views of various characters, like the corresponding animal for characters like Kerensky, Trotsky, and Kruschev will all be either absent or skewed by Orwell's own ideological blinders.

I haven't read Animal Farm, so I can't say whether it paints an accurate picture of the USSR. I'm no expert on Russian history either.

1984, however, isn't so much about Russia as it is totalitarianism in the US and the UK. 1984 seems almost prophetic.

Er... "Britain" my dear friend. Britain.Heh, that was the same thing I was thinking.

Er... "Britain" my dear friend. Britain.

More particularly, post-War Britain during austerity.


If you're looking for the USSR, try Solzhenitsyn.

Note: If you have not read either of these books, do not participate in the discussion!

Shouldn't you also be restricting comment to those that lived in Soviet Russia or another Communist country?

I mean if you really want informed opinions ...

Not really. Anyone who wants to compare 1984 with Russia would have to note that the political state did not exist on its own, but as a component of a larger global system where all the elites agreed on the same method of controlling power. For Oceania to equal Russia, the Western World would have had to equal East Asia or whatever the heck the names of those other two countries were. Otherwise, you're going to have a hell of time finding parallels within the story to things like Pope John Paul II, Solidarity in Poland,
the Czech uprisings in '68, etc.

Why would you expect a novel published in 1949 to contain parallels to a pope elected thirty years later, and a revolution still about twenty years in the future?

Shouldn't you also be restricting comment to those that lived in Soviet Russia or another Communist country?

I mean if you really want informed opinions ...

Ziiing. Right on the money.

Well, the USSR never reached that level of intrusion and monitoring that citizens in most 1st world countries are subjet to these days.
Not saying that anybody acutally uses all that data, but when it comes to mere observation of private citizens, the West has left Russia far behind long, long ago.

Absolutely true. The Soviets would only dream of how the West is today. I believe it is going to get alot worse.

In 1984 I think (and I may be wrong) that Oceania consisted also of North America, but I'm not sure. It may have been part of Eurasia. *shrugs* It doesn't matter. Like I said before, I only wanted people in who had read the book because I wanted informed thinking. I didn't want some idiot to come in and start sprouting a bunch of crap about how bad Russia is just because he saw the word "Russia" in the title.

Alright, I finished George Orwell's Animal Farm about a week ago, and just this weekend finished 1984. I pose a question: Do you think Animal Farm and 1984 present a correct picture of what it's like in Soviet Russia and other Communist areas like that? I'd like to hear what other people who have read one or both books think about them. I was very intrested by the concept of "doublethink" and the slogans:
"War is Peace"
"Slavery is Freedom"
"Ignorance is Strength"

Animal Farm is quite a good allegory of the history of Soviet Union.
1984 might apply to any totalitarian system, like the Bush-Bliar (BB) who rule USA-UK (Oceania) via media control and systematical lies (doublethink and MiniTrue (?)).
Year 1984: "we support the courageous muslim freedom fighters of Afghanistan!"
Year 2004: "we are at war with muslim fundamentalism in Afghanistan, we always fought them!"
"To ensure World Peace we need War On Terror"
...

I never read 1984, but in Animal Farm, there appeared a resemblance between Snowball and Trotsky, and Napoleon and Lenin. I would say the idea of independent animals working without humans running them is quite representitive of communism. It appears to work, it could work, but some jerk like Napoleon (the pig) is always there to screw it up.
C'mon, the dogs being taken away and raised by Napoleon to protect and love him isn't like Russia?

I think 1984 represents a sort of extreme scenario based on trends that Orwell had already seen. The technology to do the things portrayed in the novel didn't yet exist when he wrote the book so it couldn't be much more than a sci-fi with deep political and social commentary.

Animal Farm was, as I understand it, intended to symbolize the corruption inherent in a Communist system, but whether it hit the mark in comparison to Soviet life I cannot say. I do think you can almost see which of the pigs represented Stalin and Lenin tho...

Well, the USSR never reached that level of intrusion and monitoring that citizens in most 1st world countries are subjet to these days.
Not saying that anybody acutally uses all that data, but when it comes to mere observation of private citizens, the West has left Russia far behind long, long ago.

You misunderestimate the kgb, and even the cheka. Maybe America has the abillity to monitor almost anyone in their country, but that doesn't mean they literally have people watching you. The CIA doesn't do that sort of stuff, at least no way near as extensively as the KGB did, and they certainly don't monitor and arrest people for simply being politically opposed to the Bush administration and other trivial things. like the USSR, who killed people for that sort of thing.

To find out what life was like in the Soviet Union I suggest you listen to some Shostakovich, specifically the Symphonies from the 5th onwards.

As far as I know, Animal Farm is an parable of the Soviet Union. It is pretty accurate (at least in the founding part).

1984, on the other hand, is a dystopia that makes the USSR look like paradise. 1984 is NOT a correct picture - it is much, much worse.

And, for the record, I do NOT believe that we are headed for a society like 1984. We are a long way from the point where government opponents are arrested, and a dictatorship in America would have to get rid of that pesky Bill of Rights, which would instantly spark the Second American Revolution, accompanied by a total revolt among the military.

Oh, and Bush doesn't control the media. Exactly what political bent the media has depends on who you talk to, but it is always the wrong bent (well, except FOX - everyone agrees FOX is conservative).

Animal Farm is quite a good allegory of the history of Soviet Union.
1984 might apply to any totalitarian system, like the Bush-Bliar (BB) who rule USA-UK (Oceania) via media control and systematical lies (doublethink and MiniTrue (?)).
Year 1984: "we support the courageous muslim freedom fighters of Afghanistan!"
Year 2004: "we are at war with muslim fundamentalism in Afghanistan, we always fought them!"
"To ensure World Peace we need War On Terror"
...

I'd say that the word totalitarian has a certain meaning, and someone mistakes it with something different.

Animal Farm is quite a good allegory of the history of Soviet Union.
1984 might apply to any totalitarian system, like the Bush-Bliar (BB) who rule USA-UK (Oceania) via media control and systematical lies (doublethink and MiniTrue (?)).
Year 1984: "we support the courageous muslim freedom fighters of Afghanistan!"
Year 2004: "we are at war with muslim fundamentalism in Afghanistan, we always fought them!"
"To ensure World Peace we need War On Terror"

...

I want to beat whoever wrote this with a brick

Are Bush-Blair dictators? nope, they still have parliament and congress and supreme courts and in the usa state governments


Do they control the media? nope, media is controlled by private companies, if the media was controlled do you think it would have anti-government views and have multiple views?

Systematic lies? while they most likely do lie alot, all politicians lie, and what proof do you have that they have a system and are not just instinctively lieing

whats Minitrue?

your comment about Afghanistan
you have to look in context

Year 1984: "we support the courageous Muslim freedom fighters of Afghanistan!"

this was during the Russian invasion
at that time they were considered courageous and fighting for the right cause
even though they were most likely as bad as the Russians
its called the lesser of 2 evils




Year 2004: "we are at war with muslim fundamentalism in Afghanistan, we always fought them!"

we need to look at context again
to our viewpoint (our because I'm an American) the afghans are no longer freedom fighters and have crossed into the world of terrorism

when has the USA government ever denied giving aid to the afghans in 1984?
it's open and on the books
just look for it



"To ensure World Peace we need War On Terror"

look at it this way
you want to start a outlaw lieing
you need to put some kind of negative on people who lie
in the case of lieing it could be something gentle


but in the case of international terrorism a more powerful detterant is needed hence war on terror, to stop terrorism and hopefully bring world peace

now to those that have commented on spying and such

the kind of information gathering you are suggesting would be hard to carry out, nearly impossible to maintain and easily detected by the general populace
or is there some kind of advanced technology that can avoid spy detectors, power outages, and is completely invisible to the naked eye? Or do they have invisible super spies who follow people around all the time?

i would like to ask the people suggesting these things
do you live in the USA?

cause if you don't you could be mistaken which is perfectly fine

but if you live here How could you believe these things?


Or are these the same people who think JFK went back in time to kill himself?

More accurately Stalin's Soviet Union. However, materially speaking, the USSR under Stalin was far better off than Oceania although it was probably even more repressive.

In addition, things improved fairly significantly under Malenkov, Khrushchev, and during the early Brezhnev years both materially as well as in terms of civil and personal freedoms. The Soviet economic system was quite strong at the time and produced some significant real gains in living standards.

1984 was inspired by the ideas the soviet union was based on. It was never meant to be "correct." Animal farm, I felt, was pretty accurate, in a very metaphorical sense.

Why would you expect a novel published in 1949 to contain parallels to a pope elected thirty years later, and a revolution still about twenty years in the future?

You miss the larger point. For 1984 to reflect the real situation of Soviet Russia, every country would have to have been an oppressive dictatorship, because that was a crucial component of the system. The only way they kept the educated in line was by perpetual warfare and perpetual deprivation of material goods to fight the war, while at the same time making sure there were no counter-propaganda methods as you saw in stuff like the French Underground, Tokyo Rose, etc. The only way to eliminate that counter-propaganda was to ensure that every government subscribed to the same basic method of populace control. Ergo, for Oceania to = Russia, every other country in the world would have had to = the other two nations discussed in 1984.

Ignore the non-existence of the Pope at the time and focus on the non-nationstate aspect of the book.

Ziiing. Right on the money.

Whoa, whoa, whoa, there's money?

No for 1984, HELL YEAH for Animal Farm(these are my fav. books, second only to Fight Club)

No for 1984, HELL YEAH for Animal Farm(these are my fav. books, second only to Fight Club)

Not to seem too unduly severe, but you need to read more. A lot more.

I want to beat whoever wrote this with a brick

Come on, show how much you like free speech. Very democratic. Next time, I guess you'll be calling me a terrorist or a supporter thereof.
This is called political satyre, if you aren't aware of this.


Systematic lies? ... what proof do you have that they have a system and are not just instinctively lieing
Because their lies are always aimed at the same thing, that is, justifying the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan. This qualifies their lies as "systematic".
They claimed to have proof of the presence of WMDs in Iraq. They were able to find none.
They claimed that Saddam (a loathsome dictator anyway, but put into power with western support) supported terrorism and fundamentalism. He didn't.
Now they claim that a muslim country (Iran) with nukes is too dangerous, while saying nothing about a muslim country ruled by a western-supported dictator (Pakistan, Musharraf) who already has nukes and harbours talibans.



whats Minitrue?

The place Winston worked at. I never read 1984 in english, so I do not know its proper newspeak name.

added: just checked. now I'm sure that Mr.Joeandthesandwich didn't read 1984, at least not in english.



Year 1984 ...at that time they were considered courageous and fighting for the right cause
even though they were most likely as bad as the Russians
its called the lesser of 2 evils

So, in 1984 you supported a thing you admit it was "evil" just because it suited your purposes. But I recall that at the time the ones you now dub as "evil" were called "good" by the US government. Hence, doublethink.


to our viewpoint (our because I'm an American) the afghans are no longer freedom fighters and have crossed into the world of terrorism

All afghans? Sure, carpet-bomb them if you want.
You could also say "to my viewpoint", because it isn't necessary that all americans share your own viewpoint. Or your Dear Leader's.


"To ensure World Peace we need War On Terror"

look at it this way
you want to start a outlaw lieing
you need to put some kind of negative on people who lie
in the case of lieing it could be something gentle

but in the case of international terrorism a more powerful detterant is needed hence war on terror, to stop terrorism and hopefully bring world peace


War isn't a deterrant. Usually a deterrent is a thing that scares people so much (de-terreo, same root as "terror") that they don't want to do war, like the principle of ensuring mutual destruction in case of a nuclear showdown between USA and CCCP.
When deterrence fails, comes war. Islamic terrorism isn't slowing down, this means that "war on terror" has failed as deterrent.


also, quote from wiki about real-life newspeak

Charges of Newspeak are sometimes advanced when a group tries to replace a word/phrase that is politically unsuitable (e.g. "civilian casualties") or offensive (e.g. "murder") with an alternative, inoffensive euphemism (e.g. "collateral damage"),

While I think that it provides an accurate portrayal of the brutality of the Soviet Union. I think it also serves as a warning to the U.k. and U.S. which are increasingly curbing civil liberties in the name of action against terrorism. In the U.K. we are increasingly becoming a police state. I say down with the police those fascist pigs!:sniper:

You misunderestimate the kgb, and even the cheka. Maybe America has the abillity to monitor almost anyone in their country, but that doesn't mean they literally have people watching you. The CIA doesn't do that sort of stuff, at least no way near as extensively as the KGB did, and they certainly don't monitor and arrest people for simply being politically opposed to the Bush administration and other trivial things. like the USSR, who killed people for that sort of thing.

I specifically pointed out in my post that the gathered data is not used in the West in most cases. Although I think it would have been more accurate to say that much of it is not permitted as evidence in courts, but is still regularly used in criminal investigations.
And criminal is what you make criminal, it's a completely arbitrary standard that can easily be changed, depending on political climate.

I don't underestimate the secret services in the Eastern block for one minute, but if I compare the situation back then (screening phone calls, bugging rooms, reading mail) to the situation I live in today, where I know full well that I'll be on CCTV from the moment I set foot out of my house in the morning to the moment I close the door behind me at night, where I know that my digital TV provider keeps records of which channels I watch, websites keep track of how many times I look at them, my converstation on MSN are being screened, my mobile phone provider keeps a log of the numbers I call and text (I found this out by accident one day), my bank knows what I bought on my shopping trip last Sunday and how often I travel by train and plane, and this is just the stuff I KNOW off, I can't help thinking that all in all I live in a KGB agent's wet dream.

Animal farm is quite accurate about USSR.

1984 is in my opinion that what Stalin's USSR would had been if it had had better technology. Its not exactly accurate but some really nice analogies can be found.
Both in Oceania and in USSR, people were kept uninformed about life in foreign countries.
Oceania repeatedly changed alliances with Eastasia and Eurasia, comparable to that how USSR was hostile aganist Nazi Germany, then became friendly towards it in 1939 and hostile towards western countries, and then changed sides because of barbarossa again in 1941. In both cases, every time there was also change in propaganda.
Oceania was in eternal war to justify opressing its people. USSR was constantly preparing for war with someone, Firstly Entente(winners of WW I) was enemy, then with rise of Hitler, Nazi Germany became new enemy, after WW II Western Allies/NATO became enemy, existence of enemy meant also constant arming aganist it.
Rewriting history was also practice in USSR, about Russian Civil War Stalin's achievments were exagerated and his opponents like Trotsky are forgotten and downplayed.
These 2 pictures are also really nice example how photos were censored:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/15/The_Commissar_Vanishes_1.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bd/The_Commissar_Vanishes_2.jpg
And finally of course constant propaganda. In Russia there are still quite many people who think that Stalin was great leader. Soviet propaganda played importnant role in this.

Of course I do not deny that 1984 has parallels with other states(like Nazi Germany) too, just comparison with Stalin's USSR is quite accurate.

The soviet union was not Russia.

Don't ever imagine that the Soviet Union was some voluntary confederation of equals. It was an empire, a Russian Empire. To the extent that three of the Soviet "Republics" were added by military conquest, and kept in by military occupation (Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania).

Animal Farm was a good fable for the Soviet Union.

1984 was peculiar in some ways. Orwell seemed to have been more optimistic about what socialism would achieve than can be justified by the facts (for example, he talks of perpetual war needed to dispose of the production beyond subsistance to keep the people down, and under the regime. In fact, without perpetual war, socialist production would have degenerated to that point anyway)

Newspeak was particularly interesting to me, especially these days with the idea of "political correctness". We see the European Commission trying to excise terms such as "islamofascist", and "islamic fascism", or defining certain forms of speech as "islamophobia" in order to criminalise them.

Animal farm is a close description of the USSR shortly after the Revolution, the struggles for power between Stalin and Trotsky, the mistreatment of Soviet citizens and the corrupting influence of power.

Shouldn't you also be restricting comment to those that lived in Soviet Russia or another Communist country?

I mean if you really want informed opinions ...

No.

It's fully possible to understand much of what life in the USSR was like from first hand documentation and personal testimony, even if you were never there. If we were to restrict comment to those who were there, it would be impossible to debate anything of a historic nature.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_Farm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nineteen_Eighty-Four

Let me see.

"In Soviet Russia, animals own YOU!"

Yes.

Fail.

"In Soviet Russia, animal FARMS you":p