Character Comparisons

In the book that I am currently reading, 1984, the main character is a skeptical government who works in a future-dystopian London named Winston Smith. To give you an idea of who he really is, the mere fact that he works for the government is puzzling. His ideas and small acts of rebellion make you wonder, why in the heck does he work for these people and do what he does? Wait, I should probably explain exactly what it is he does. That would be helpful, wouldn't it? Well, Winston essentially covers up the truth and comes up with his own version of what happened. But, there are guidelines as to what he's allowed to write. He has to come up with a story that makes Big Brother (the leader of his country) look like a saint, no matter what actually happened. While Winston still performs this task dutifully, he has a covert way of rebelling against the very people he works for. He has many thoughts of taking down Big Brother, thinks everyone else is just a bunch of mindless morons, and breaks a few laws along the way (one of which is writing a diary).You're probably thinking to yourself; why would Winston continue to work for the government if he hates them? That's what I thought originally, until it dawned on me that if Winston were to just stop working in the Ministry of Truth and got caught thinking and writing about rebellious things, he would essentially be "vaporized", or erased completely. "It seemed to him that he knew instinctively who would survive and who would perish, though just what it was that made for survival, it was not easy to say" (53-54 Orwell).

Now for the actual comparison (which I haven't gotten to yet, even though it's the title of this entire post). I'm comparing Winston to Guy Montag from Fahrenheit 451. I think they are both similar characters living in similar societies. They are both rebellious against the government, even if they aren't open about it. Well, Montag wasn't open about it in the beginning of the book. They are also similar because they both work for the government. More specifically, they help censor certain things from their own societies. They both also have wives who support their governments completely and follow the rules like the rest of their societies. Oh, and both wives leave Winston and Montag, showing that both men are such great husbands! Neither character has children either, but for two different reasons: Winston doesn't have a child because his wife couldn't have children, but Montag doesn't have children because Mildred didn't want any. Another difference between Montag and Winston is that their anger with their societies is aimed at different aspects of the government. Montag is mad at the mere fact that books are being burned and censored, while Winston is mad at the government as a whole.

Winston and Montag share a few differences, but for the most part, they are the same. They both share similar views of the future of their societies and they both want to make a difference. Oh, and they aren't very good with women.

Why George Orwell Wrote 1984

George Orwell, the author of 1984, brings up a lot of interesting and meaningful points throughout the book. But the big question is; why did he write it? I think this question comes down to one thing; what was society like during his time period? If we can answer that question, then I think it'll answer the first one.

George Orwell wrote this book in the 1950s or 1960s, a time where things weren't necessarily all that great. Granted, I didn't live in that time period (obviously), and neither did my parents (I'm pretty sure they're not THAT old). But things were starting to change a little bit. The government was becoming slightly more strict with its policies and the way it handled things. People started to become a little afraid and paranoid when it came to technology. People thought that technology might be used to spy on people, instead of being used for the greater good. In that time, technology was new, just coming onto the scene, just beginning to advance. To people back then, the sky was the limit. If you could put a moving picture on a screen in your living room, why couldn't you invent machines that could read your thoughts? Or tiny cameras? Or listening devices that could hear your every word? See what I mean?

To sum it up, I think that George Orwell wrote 1984 because he wanted to express how people back in his time felt about technology. He wanted to, in a way, warn people about the ways that it could be abused. He also wanted to warn against someone having too much control over technology. He wanted to show people that it could bring great things, but also very bad things. He wanted to warn people back then, and maybe even people in our time, not to let technology reach that point of being used to control us and monitor our actions and thoughts 24/7. I mean, think about it... What would happen if our society became that way?

1984 synopsis and analysis: http://www.online-literature.com/orwell/1984/

The most important line from a chapter is...

The most important line from the fourth chapter of the book that I am currently reading, 1984, is, "It struck him as curious that you could create dead men but not living ones" (Orwell 43). This line is important because it shows the true meaning of what is happening in Winston's society. It's showing how if a living person ever did something that defied the government, then any record of them ever existing had to be erased. But in the Ministry of Truth, you could make up a person who wasn't even real, but they would be passed off as a real person. It shows how society in the books has deteriorated so much that the government can erase anyone they want to and make up someone who was never actually real.

I mean, think about it: what if, one day, one of your friends just disappears from school. You'll probably sit there and wonder, "hm, I wonder where they are"? But if you ask the teacher where they are, they'll just say, "who"? There would be no records of your friend ever existing; pictures, attendance lists, IDs... NOTHING. They would just be gone and forgotten, just like that. That's what it's like in 1984. People would just be snatched up and executed over night, never to be seen again. No trace of them would be left behind. They would just be... gone.

The best thing about my book is...

The best thing about the book that I am currently reading, 1984, is that it reminds me of other dystopian books that I've read, but it also keeps it original. There are a lot of qualities in it that make it like a lot of dystopian novels, but there are also qualities that make it distinct from all the others. I also love how this book was made in the past (I'm sorry I keep bringing this up), but a lot of the events that occur are happening today. It's almost like George Orwell practically foresaw the future (except it's just a tad bit less extreme than what he thought). I can relate what is happening in the book to what's going on in our own country, and that's what I love about it.

The other thing I love about this book is that a lot of dystopian books tend to focus more on romance (*cough cough* Hunger Games *cough cough*) than the actual reason why it's a dystopian society. They also tend to focus on teenagers instead of adults. In most of the books, I wonder, why is it just the teens doing all the work? Why are they leading this huge revolution? In 1984, the focus is on the adults, and how the society affects them (and there's less romance). You get to see what a society like that is like from a different perspective, and that's what makes it interesting.