Got through quite a few pages last night, and my thoughts so far:
I am definitely right - there is no such thing as a Utopian novel. All are dsytopic in their own ways.
Winston's thoughts about how the prole could easily rise up and overthrow the government is an interesting idea. You would think that would be true - that by sheer numbers, you could win, but I don't history bears that out. Otherwise, the genocide in Rwanda would have never happened. There, the general population of Tutsis, who were definitely fighting back against the very minority Hutus, would have easily won if quantity were all that mattered. The rub? The Hutus had the power and the weapons.
That is just one example of colonization where "quality," distinguished as power and might int he cases I am speaking of, has triumphed over quantity. You could easily substitute the Spanish in Central and South America or the English in what is now the United States into my example up above, and the result would be the same. Overwhelming numbers of people do not often win over power and might, even though that would be the desired and righteous result in many cases.
Love the way Orwell writes., by the way, especially after just finishing a Faulkner novel. I really don't like stream of consciousness writing (therefore, really not looking forward to the last book on this list of mine - Ulysses by James Joyce); I prefer actual sentences indicating complete thoughts. Call me old-fashioned!
No comments:
Post a Comment