1984 student essays

Home — Essay Samples — Literature — Books — 1984

Essays on 1984

Hook examples for "1984" essays, the dystopian warning hook.

Open your essay by discussing George Orwell's "1984" as a prophetic warning against totalitarianism and government surveillance. Explore how the novel's themes are eerily relevant in today's world.

The Orwellian Language Hook

Delve into the concept of Newspeak in "1984" and its parallels to modern language manipulation. Discuss how the novel's portrayal of controlled language reflects real-world instances of propaganda and censorship.

Big Brother is Watching Hook

Begin with a focus on surveillance and privacy concerns. Analyze the omnipresent surveillance in the novel and draw connections to contemporary debates over surveillance technologies, data privacy, and civil liberties.

The Power of Doublethink Hook

Explore the psychological manipulation in "1984" through the concept of doublethink. Discuss how individuals in the novel are coerced into accepting contradictory beliefs, and examine instances of cognitive dissonance in society today.

The Character of Winston Smith Hook

Introduce your readers to the protagonist, Winston Smith, and his journey of rebellion against the Party. Analyze his character development and the universal theme of resistance against oppressive regimes.

Technology and Control Hook

Discuss the role of technology in "1984" and its implications for control. Explore how advancements in surveillance technology, social media, and artificial intelligence resonate with the novel's themes of control and manipulation.

The Ministry of Truth Hook

Examine the Ministry of Truth in the novel, responsible for rewriting history. Compare this to the manipulation of information and historical revisionism in contemporary politics and media.

Media Manipulation and Fake News Hook

Draw parallels between the Party's manipulation of information in "1984" and the spread of misinformation and fake news in today's media landscape. Discuss the consequences of a distorted reality.

Relevance of Thoughtcrime Hook

Explore the concept of thoughtcrime and its impact on individual freedom in the novel. Discuss how society today grapples with issues related to freedom of thought, expression, and censorship.

Examples of Paradoxes in 1984

A comparison of dystopias: "fahrenheit 451" and "1984", made-to-order essay as fast as you need it.

Each essay is customized to cater to your unique preferences

+ experts online

Tranquility in George Orwells 1984

George orwell’s representation of authority as illustrated in his book, 1984, orwell's use of literary devices to portray the theme of totalitarianism in 1984, the culture of fear in 1984, a novel by george orwell, let us write you an essay from scratch.

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

1984 by George Orwell: Literary Devices to Portray Government Controlling Its Citizens

The use of language to control people in 1984, dictatorship of the people: orwell's 1984 as an allegory for the early soviet union, searching for truth in 1984, get a personalized essay in under 3 hours.

Expert-written essays crafted with your exact needs in mind

A World Without Love: The Ramifications of an Affectionless Society in 1984

On double-think and newspeak: orwell's language, the theme of survival and selfishness in the handmaid's tale in 1984, government surveillance in 1984 by george orwell: bogus security, george orwell's 1984 as a historical allegory, exploitation of language in george orwell's 1984, how orwell's 1984 is relevant to today's audience, the relation of orwel’s 1984 to the uighur conflict in china, symbolism in 1984: the soviet union as representation of the fears people, parallels to today in 1984 by george orwell, the relationship between power and emotions in 1984, proletariat vs protagonist: winston smith's class conflict in 1984, a review of george orwell’s book, 1984, o'brien as a dehumanizing villain in 1984, family in 1984 and persepolis, the philosophy of determinism in 1984, orwell's use of rhetorical strategies in 1984, control the citizens in the orwell's novel 1984, dangers of totalitarianism as depicted in 1984, dystopian life in '1984' was a real-life in china.

8 June 1949, George Orwell

Novel; Dystopia, Political Fiction, Social Science Fiction Novel

Winston Smith, Julia, O'Brien, Aaronson, Jones, and Rutherford, Ampleforth, Charrington, Tom Parsons, Syme, Mrs. Parsons, Katharine Smith

Since Orwell has been a democratic socialist, he has modelled his book and motives after the Stalinist Russia

Power, Repressive Behaviors, Totalitarianism, Mass Surveillance, Human Behaviors

The novel has brought up the "Orwellian" term, which stands for "Big Brother" "Thoughtcrime" and many other terms that we know well. It has been the reflection of totalitarianism

1984 represents a dystopian writing that has followed the life of Winston Smith who belongs to the "Party",which stands for the total control, which is also known as the Big Brother. It controls every aspect of people's lives. Is it ever possible to go against the system or will it take even more control. It constantly follows the fear and oppression with the surveillance being the main part of 1984. There is Party’s official O’Brien who is following the resistance movement, which represents an alternative, which is the symbol of hope.

Before George Orwell wrote his famous book, he worked for the BBC as the propagandist during World War II. The novel has been named 1980, then 1982 before finally settling on its name. Orwell fought tuberculosis while writing the novel. He died seven months after 1984 was published. Orwell almost died during the boating trip while he was writing the novel. Orwell himself has been under government surveillance. It was because of his socialist opinions. The slogan that the book uses "2 + 2 = 5" originally came from Communist Russia and stood for the five-year plan that had to be achieved during only four years. Orwell also used various Japanese propaganda when writing his novel, precisely his "Thought Police" idea.

“Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.” “But if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought.” “Being in a minority, even in a minority of one, did not make you mad. There was truth and there was untruth, and if you clung to the truth even against the whole world, you were not mad.” “Confession is not betrayal. What you say or do doesn't matter; only feelings matter. If they could make me stop loving you-that would be the real betrayal.” “Power is in tearing human minds to pieces and putting them together again in new shapes of your own choosing.” "But you could not have pure love or pure lust nowadays. No emotion was pure, because everything was mixed up with fear and hatred."

The most important aspect of 1984 is Thought Police, which controls every thought. It has been featured in numerous books, plays, music pieces, poetry, and anything that has been created when one had to deal with Social Science and Politics. Another factor that represents culmination is thinking about overthrowing the system or trying to organize a resistance movement. It has numerous reflections of the post WW2 world. Although the novella is graphic and quite intense, it portrays dictatorship and is driven by fear through the lens of its characters.

This essay topic is often used when writing about “The Big Brother” or totalitarian regimes, which makes 1984 a flexible topic that can be taken as the foundation. Even if you have to write about the use of fear by the political regimes, knowing the facts about this novel will help you to provide an example.

1. Enteen, G. M. (1984). George Orwell And the Theory of Totalitarianism: A 1984 Retrospective. The Journal of General Education, 36(3), 206-215. (https://www.jstor.org/stable/27797000) 2. Hughes, I. (2021). 1984. Literary Cultures, 4(2). (https://journals.ntu.ac.uk/index.php/litc/article/view/340) 3. Patai, D. (1982). Gamesmanship and Androcentrism in Orwell's 1984. PMLA, 97(5), 856-870. (https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/pmla/article/abs/gamesmanship-and-androcentrism-in-orwells-1984/F1B026BE9D97EE0114E248AA733B189D) 4. Paden, R. (1984). Surveillance and Torture: Foucault and Orwell on the Methods of Discipline. Social Theory and Practice, 10(3), 261-271. (https://www.pdcnet.org/soctheorpract/content/soctheorpract_1984_0010_0003_0261_0272) 5. Tyner, J. A. (2004). Self and space, resistance and discipline: a Foucauldian reading of George Orwell's 1984. Social & Cultural Geography, 5(1), 129-149. (https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1464936032000137966) 6. Kellner, D. (1990). From 1984 to one-dimensional man: Critical reflections on Orwell and Marcuse. Current Perspectives in Social Theory, 10, 223-52. (https://pages.gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/kellner/essays/from1984toonedimensional.pdf) 7. Samuelson, P. (1984). Good legal writing: of Orwell and window panes. U. Pitt. L. Rev., 46, 149. (https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/upitt46&div=13&id=&page=) 8. Fadaee, E. (2011). Translation techniques of figures of speech: A case study of George Orwell's" 1984 and Animal Farm. Journal of English and Literature, 2(8), 174-181. (https://academicjournals.org/article/article1379427897_Fadaee.pdf) 9. Patai, D. (1984, January). Orwell's despair, Burdekin's hope: Gender and power in dystopia. In Women's Studies International Forum (Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 85-95). Pergamon. (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0277539584900621) 10. Cole, M. B. (2022). The Desperate Radicalism of Orwell’s 1984: Power, Socialism, and Utopia in Dystopian Times. Political Research Quarterly, 10659129221083286. (https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/10659129221083286)

Relevant topics

• Thank You Ma Am
• A Rose For Emily
• Between The World and Me
• Of Mice and Men
• The Great Gatsby
• Lord of The Flies
• The Story of An Hour
• To Kill a Mockingbird
• The Alchemist
• Catcher in The Rye

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Bibliography

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

George Orwell

Ask litcharts ai: the answer to your questions.

Welcome to the LitCharts study guide on George Orwell's 1984 . Created by the original team behind SparkNotes, LitCharts are the world's best literature guides.

1984: Introduction

1984: plot summary, 1984: detailed summary & analysis, 1984: themes, 1984: quotes, 1984: characters, 1984: symbols, 1984: theme wheel, brief biography of george orwell.

Historical Context of 1984

Other books related to 1984.

• Full Title: Nineteen Eighty-Four: A Novel
• When Written: 1945-49; outline written 1943
• Where Written: Jura, Scotland
• When Published: June 1949
• Literary Period: Late Modernism
• Genre: Novel / Satire / Parable
• Setting: London in the year 1984
• Climax: Winston is tortured in Room 101
• Antagonist: O'Brien
• Point of View: Third-Person Limited

Extra Credit for 1984

Outspoken Anti-Communist. Orwell didn't just write literature that condemned the Communist state of the USSR. He did everything he could, from writing editorials to compiling lists of men he knew were Soviet spies, to combat the willful blindness of many intellectuals in the West to USSR atrocities.

Working Title. Orwell's working title for the novel was The Last Man in Europe .

Experience the Joy of Learning

• Just Great DataBase
• Study Guides

1984 Essays

In the book “Nineteen Eighty-Four,” written by George Orwell, readers are introduced to a dystopia, where the Party controls everything that people can do, such as thoughts, language, behavior and media. In the grim world of “Nineteen Eighty-Four,” the government even wants to control the thoughts...

Thesis Statement After going through both the pieces of literature, it transpires that both differences and similarities exist between Brave New World and 1984. They are both prophetic novels, they were both written in turbulent times, both suffering changes that could lapse the future of the world...

1 235 words

Both Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World and George Orwell’s 1984 present an anti-utopian future, in which anything that might be validly equated with freedom has been destroyed. Although markedly different in many ways, these two books show a grim parallelism in their presentation of many of the ways...

1 776 words

In a fascinating book by Neil Postman entitled “Amusing Ourselves to Death,” the author describes George Orwell’s “1984” vis-à-vis Huxley’s “A Brave New World.” In his comparison, Postman gives the context of Orwell’s book in contrast to that of Huxley’s. He says that in “1984,” Orwell feared...

Reporter: We are indeed very fortunate today because we have been allowed a once in a lifetime opportunity to interview none other than the enigmatic, magnificent, and truly all-powerful leader, Big Brother. As nobody is allowed to actually see Oceania’s supreme leader, he will be speaking to use...

Abstract George Orwell’s novel 1984 present a dystopian scenario wherein state interference is present in all aspects of citizens’ lives. But in the context of the novel, state interference is used as a tool for the ruling class to remain in power. Information, for instance, is heavily censored in...

1 523 words

George Orwell provides to his readers in 1984 a dystopian look at how totalitarianism can influence the thought, speech, and action of the citizens of the effected state. The underlying theme throughout the text is the effect of Big Brother, from the loss of past language replaced by Newspeak and...

1 524 words

A sudden flash of light illuminated the night.  Apparently, my car went a couple inches past the stop light line, causing the traffic camera to take a picture.  It was astounding to me that even at an isolated intersection such as this one, people are always under the iron hand of the law. Under...

1 018 words

In George Orwell’s 1984, Winston Smith is introduced as a man with an itchy varicose ulcer above his right ankle (talk about a symbol) who knew that the simple act of writing in a diary could quite possibly get him killed, yet he finds it curious in the moment, that in the act of putting pen to...

1 476 words

In considering the question of what aspects of today’s world relate most to the fictional, dystopian world presented in George Orwell’s 1984, it might be easier to ask what aspects of today’s world – particularly in the United States, once a beacon of hope for the world – doesn’t it resemble...

1 195 words

I have come to a point in life that many people have not. I have made a firm decision to recommit myself to pursuing my dreams. While there are those who believe that with an ounce of luck and a ton of persistence anything can be accomplished, I believe that there is no reason to expend so much...

One of the fundamental liberties that is enshrined in the Constitution of almost every government in the world is the right to privacy. People are given the right to be safe in their houses and persons against warrantless searches and seizures. This is an almost absolute right that can only be...

In his novel 1984 (1949), English writer George Orwell (1903-1950) warned readers about the dangers of totalitarianism. The novel focused on the fictional country of Oceania, which, ironically, bore striking similarities to Nazi Germany. Both Oceania and Nazi Germany were totalitarian societies...

The question of determinism versus free will in George Orwell’s 1984 is highly relevant, as Oceania’s populace is faced with a reality in which all their thoughts and actions are controlled by the ruling party. The citizens experience an existence in which they are threatened with bodily harm if...

2 026 words

When I read George Orwell's dystopian masterpiece, "1984," I realized it was intended by its author to act as an entertaining suspense-narrative and also as a warning to future generations. The story probes deep ideas related to the influence of tyranny in human society. The motivation for...

Nineteen Eighty-Four is a novel by English author George Orwell. The novel tackles social and political matters in a deconstructive manner. The novel revolves around the life of Winston Smith who works in the ministry of truth as a historian who edits old newspaper archives and re-tells history in...

In the dark and grim world of Nineteen Eighty-Four, George Orwell has depicted a negative Utopia or dystopia, life under a totalitarian government in the future. In his vision of this dark future, people’s lives, actions, thoughts, media, language, in short everything is under the absolute control...

The motion picture Nineteen-Eighty-Four is a British movie taken from the novel of the same title by George Orwell in 1949, both the film and the novel were grounded from the author's imagination of the year (Redford, 1984). George Owell's widow, Sonia Brownell, agreed to the film adaptation...

Often, people and groups, in an attempt to create a better, more perfect, society, end up creating just the opposite. This opposite is termed a dystopian society and is the subject of George Orwell’s novel 1984. In this novel, Orwell uses literary devices such as metaphor, symbolism and diction to...

The 20th century has given the literary world a completely new genre – a dystopian novel. The main purpose of this genre is to envisage the ruthlessness of technological progress subdued by the government. Eric Arthur Blake, an English writer and journalist more famous under his pseudonym...

It is not easy to compare or choose one of the two world-known anti-utopias. It is possible to allocate for an indefinitely long time common elements that emphasize the similarities of works. There are an anti-utopia, decadence, gloomy mood, hardening of the soul, the crisis of morality, struggle...

Eric Arthur Blair, a writer, and publicist, was born on June 25, 1903, known throughout the world under the pseudonym George Orwell. His novels “Animal Farm” and "1984" are the most striking works written in the genre of anti-utopia, whose flowering dates back to the 20th...

When it comes to symbolism, 1984 is treasurer full of symbols, allusions, and hints. But what is symbolism in the first place? This is a literary device which is used to hide a meaningful abstract idea behind an object, person, or a place. Implicit or explicit, symbols convey additional messages...

According to Orwell, there is nothing and nothing more terrible than the total lack of freedom/ “1984” is a cult novel of the English writer George Orwell, who became the canon of the genre of anti-utopia. Here you can find the fear, despair and struggle against the system, which...

These two novels, 1984 and Brave New World, seems pretty similar from the first glance but, in fact, they demonstrate two opposite types of mass manipulation. Written with different aims, both of them reveal in what way people are deceived and used by their authority without even realizing. They...

Perhaps the most legendary dystopian novel of the previous century, 1984 is a masterful attempt to enlighten the readers about the dangers any totalitarian ideology hides within itself. George Orwell wrote his literary masterpiece after one of the most devastating massacres in history &ndash...

According to George Orwell, the freedom of speech is an essential element that should be granted by any authorities. When people are deprived of the possibility to express their thoughts in whatever form they want, then consider that there is no freedom of speech at all. The same goes for...

The novel prepared by the genius of Literature Orwell 1948 is a treasure of various philosophical symbols. The author uses various stylistic verbal instruments to reinforce the ironic shadow of this masterpiece. The irony is a literary term which denotes irreconcilable meanings of two or more...

There are a great amount of similarities when you compare 1984 and Hamlet, about maintaining high moral standards. First of all in 1984 the proles are forbidden to interact with prostitutes, because they are not supposed to fall in love and they are not supposed to enjoy sex. “but a real love...

Doublethink Is Stronger Than Orwell Imagined

What 1984 means today

No novel of the past century has had more influence than George Orwell’s 1984 . The title, the adjectival form of the author’s last name, the vocabulary of the all-powerful Party that rules the superstate Oceania with the ideology of Ingsoc— doublethink , memory hole , unperson , thoughtcrime , Newspeak , Thought Police , Room 101 , Big Brother —they’ve all entered the English language as instantly recognizable signs of a nightmare future. It’s almost impossible to talk about propaganda, surveillance, authoritarian politics, or perversions of truth without dropping a reference to 1984. Throughout the Cold War, the novel found avid underground readers behind the Iron Curtain who wondered, How did he know?

It was also assigned reading for several generations of American high-school students. I first encountered 1984 in 10th-grade English class. Orwell’s novel was paired with Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World , whose hedonistic and pharmaceutical dystopia seemed more relevant to a California teenager in the 1970s than did the bleak sadism of Oceania. I was too young and historically ignorant to understand where 1984 came from and exactly what it was warning against. Neither the book nor its author stuck with me. In my 20s, I discovered Orwell’s essays and nonfiction books and reread them so many times that my copies started to disintegrate, but I didn’t go back to 1984 . Since high school, I’d lived through another decade of the 20th century, including the calendar year of the title, and I assumed I already “knew” the book. It was too familiar to revisit.

Read: Teaching ‘1984’ in 2016

So when I recently read the novel again, I wasn’t prepared for its power. You have to clear away what you think you know, all the terminology and iconography and cultural spin-offs, to grasp the original genius and lasting greatness of 1984 . It is both a profound political essay and a shocking, heartbreaking work of art. And in the Trump era , it’s a best seller .

The Ministry of Truth: The Biography of George Orwell’s 1984 , by the British music critic Dorian Lynskey, makes a rich and compelling case for the novel as the summation of Orwell’s entire body of work and a master key to understanding the modern world. The book was published in 1949, when Orwell was dying of tuberculosis , but Lynskey dates its biographical sources back more than a decade to Orwell’s months in Spain as a volunteer on the republican side of the country’s civil war. His introduction to totalitarianism came in Barcelona, when agents of the Soviet Union created an elaborate lie to discredit Trotskyists in the Spanish government as fascist spies.

Left-wing journalists readily accepted the fabrication, useful as it was to the cause of communism. Orwell didn’t, exposing the lie with eyewitness testimony in journalism that preceded his classic book Homage to Catalonia —and that made him a heretic on the left. He was stoical about the boredom and discomforts of trench warfare—he was shot in the neck and barely escaped Spain with his life—but he took the erasure of truth hard. It threatened his sense of what makes us sane, and life worth living. “History stopped in 1936,” he later told his friend Arthur Koestler, who knew exactly what Orwell meant. After Spain, just about everything he wrote and read led to the creation of his final masterpiece. “History stopped,” Lynskey writes, “and Nineteen Eighty-Four began.”

The biographical story of 1984 —the dying man’s race against time to finish his novel in a remote cottage on the Isle of Jura , off Scotland—will be familiar to many Orwell readers. One of Lynskey’s contributions is to destroy the notion that its terrifying vision can be attributed to, and in some way disregarded as, the death wish of a tuberculosis patient. In fact, terminal illness roused in Orwell a rage to live—he got remarried on his deathbed—just as the novel’s pessimism is relieved, until its last pages, by Winston Smith’s attachment to nature, antique objects, the smell of coffee, the sound of a proletarian woman singing, and above all his lover, Julia. 1984 is crushingly grim, but its clarity and rigor are stimulants to consciousness and resistance. According to Lynskey, “Nothing in Orwell’s life and work supports a diagnosis of despair.”

Lynskey traces the literary genesis of 1984 to the utopian fictions of the optimistic 19th century—Edward Bellamy’s Looking Backward (1888); the sci-fi novels of H. G. Wells, which Orwell read as a boy—and their dystopian successors in the 20th, including the Russian Yevgeny Zamyatin’s We (1924) and Huxley’s Brave New World (1932). The most interesting pages in The Ministry of Truth are Lynskey’s account of the novel’s afterlife. The struggle to claim 1984 began immediately upon publication, with a battle over its political meaning. Conservative American reviewers concluded that Orwell’s main target wasn’t just the Soviet Union but the left generally. Orwell, fading fast, waded in with a statement explaining that the novel was not an attack on any particular government but a satire of the totalitarian tendencies in Western society and intellectuals: “The moral to be drawn from this dangerous nightmare situation is a simple one: Don’t let it happen. It depends on you .” But every work of art escapes the artist’s control—the more popular and complex, the greater the misunderstandings.

Lynskey’s account of the reach of 1984 is revelatory. The novel has inspired movies, television shows, plays, a ballet, an opera, a David Bowie album , imitations, parodies, sequels, rebuttals, Lee Harvey Oswald, the Black Panther Party, and the John Birch Society. It has acquired something of the smothering ubiquity of Big Brother himself: 1984 is watching you. With the arrival of the year 1984, the cultural appropriations rose to a deafening level. That January an ad for the Apple Macintosh was watched by 96 million people during the Super Bowl and became a marketing legend. The Mac, represented by a female athlete, hurls a sledgehammer at a giant telescreen and explodes the shouting face of a man—oppressive technology—to the astonishment of a crowd of gray zombies. The message: “You’ll see why 1984 won’t be like ‘1984.’ ”

The argument recurs every decade or so: Orwell got it wrong. Things haven’t turned out that bad. The Soviet Union is history. Technology is liberating. But Orwell never intended his novel to be a prediction, only a warning. And it’s as a warning that 1984 keeps finding new relevance. The week of Donald Trump’s inauguration, when the president’s adviser Kellyanne Conway justified his false crowd estimate by using the phrase alternative facts , the novel returned to the best-seller lists. A theatrical adaptation was rushed to Broadway. The vocabulary of Newspeak went viral. An authoritarian president who stood the term fake news on its head, who once said, “What you’re seeing and what you’re reading is not what’s happening,” has given 1984 a whole new life.

What does the novel mean for us? Not Room 101 in the Ministry of Love, where Winston is interrogated and tortured until he loses everything he holds dear. We don’t live under anything like a totalitarian system. “By definition, a country in which you are free to read Nineteen Eighty-Four is not the country described in Nineteen Eighty-Four ,” Lynskey acknowledges. Instead, we pass our days under the nonstop surveillance of a telescreen that we bought at the Apple Store, carry with us everywhere, and tell everything to, without any coercion by the state. The Ministry of Truth is Facebook, Google, and cable news. We have met Big Brother and he is us.

Trump’s election brought a rush of cautionary books with titles like On Tyranny , Fascism: A Warning , and How Fascism Works . My local bookstore set up a totalitarian-themed table and placed the new books alongside 1984 . They pointed back to the 20th century—if it happened in Germany, it could happen here—and warned readers how easily democracies collapse. They were alarm bells against complacency and fatalism—“ the politics of inevitability ,” in the words of the historian Timothy Snyder, “a sense that the future is just more of the present, that the laws of progress are known, that there are no alternatives, and therefore nothing really to be done.” The warnings were justified, but their emphasis on the mechanisms of earlier dictatorships drew attention away from the heart of the malignancy—not the state, but the individual. The crucial issue was not that Trump might abolish democracy but that Americans had put him in a position to try. Unfreedom today is voluntary. It comes from the bottom up.

We are living with a new kind of regime that didn’t exist in Orwell’s time. It combines hard nationalism—the diversion of frustration and cynicism into xenophobia and hatred—with soft distraction and confusion: a blend of Orwell and Huxley, cruelty and entertainment. The state of mind that the Party enforces through terror in 1984 , where truth becomes so unstable that it ceases to exist, we now induce in ourselves. Totalitarian propaganda unifies control over all information, until reality is what the Party says it is—the goal of Newspeak is to impoverish language so that politically incorrect thoughts are no longer possible. Today the problem is too much information from too many sources, with a resulting plague of fragmentation and division—not excessive authority but its disappearance, which leaves ordinary people to work out the facts for themselves, at the mercy of their own prejudices and delusions.

During the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign, propagandists at a Russian troll farm used social media to disseminate a meme: “ ‘The People Will Believe What the Media Tells Them They Believe.’  — George Orwell.” But Orwell never said this. The moral authority of his name was stolen and turned into a lie toward that most Orwellian end: the destruction of belief in truth. The Russians needed partners in this effort and found them by the millions, especially among America’s non-elites. In 1984 , working-class people are called “proles,” and Winston believes they’re the only hope for the future. As Lynskey points out, Orwell didn’t foresee “that the common man and woman would embrace doublethink as enthusiastically as the intellectuals and, without the need for terror or torture, would choose to believe that two plus two was whatever they wanted it to be.”

We stagger under the daily load of doublethink pouring from Trump, his enablers in the Inner Party, his mouthpieces in the Ministry of Truth, and his fanatical supporters among the proles. Spotting doublethink in ourselves is much harder. “To see what is in front of one’s nose needs a constant struggle,” Orwell wrote . In front of my nose, in the world of enlightened and progressive people where I live and work, a different sort of doublethink has become pervasive. It’s not the claim that true is fake or that two plus two makes five. Progressive doublethink—which has grown worse in reaction to the right-wing kind—creates a more insidious unreality because it operates in the name of all that is good. Its key word is justice —a word no one should want to live without. But today the demand for justice forces you to accept contradictions that are the essence of doublethink.

For example, many on the left now share an unacknowledged but common assumption that a good work of art is made of good politics and that good politics is a matter of identity. The progressive view of a book or play depends on its political stance, and its stance—even its subject matter—is scrutinized in light of the group affiliation of the artist: Personal identity plus political position equals aesthetic value. This confusion of categories guides judgments all across the worlds of media, the arts, and education, from movie reviews to grant committees. Some people who register the assumption as doublethink might be privately troubled, but they don’t say so publicly. Then self-censorship turns into self-deception, until the recognition itself disappears—a lie you accept becomes a lie you forget. In this way, intelligent people do the work of eliminating their own unorthodoxy without the Thought Police.

Recommended Reading

A lost scottish island, george orwell, and the future of maps.

David Simon and E.L. Doctorow on 'the Potential for the Orwellian Nightmare'

Marriage Proposals Are Stupid

Orthodoxy is also enforced by social pressure, nowhere more intensely than on Twitter, where the specter of being shamed or “canceled” produces conformity as much as the prospect of adding to your tribe of followers does. This pressure can be more powerful than a party or state, because it speaks in the name of the people and in the language of moral outrage, against which there is, in a way, no defense. Certain commissars with large followings patrol the precincts of social media and punish thought criminals, but most progressives assent without difficulty to the stifling consensus of the moment and the intolerance it breeds—not out of fear, but because they want to be counted on the side of justice.

This willing constriction of intellectual freedom will do lasting damage. It corrupts the ability to think clearly, and it undermines both culture and progress. Good art doesn’t come from wokeness, and social problems starved of debate can’t find real solutions. “Nothing is gained by teaching a parrot a new word,” Orwell wrote in 1946. “What is needed is the right to print what one believes to be true, without having to fear bullying or blackmail from any side.” Not much has changed since the 1940s. The will to power still passes through hatred on the right and virtue on the left.

1984 will always be an essential book, regardless of changes in ideologies, for its portrayal of one person struggling to hold on to what is real and valuable. “Sanity is not statistical,” Winston thinks one night as he slips off to sleep. Truth, it turns out, is the most fragile thing in the world. The central drama of politics is the one inside your skull.

This article appears in the July 2019 print edition with the headline “George Orwell’s Unheeded Warning.”

​When you buy a book using a link on this page, we receive a commission. Thank you for supporting The Atlantic.

88 pages • 2 hours read

A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more. For select classroom titles, we also provide Teaching Guides with discussion and quiz questions to prompt student engagement.

Introduction

Before Reading

Reading Context

During Reading

Reading Questions & Paired Texts

After Reading

Discussion/Analysis Prompt

Essay Questions

Exam Questions

Exam Answer Key

Use these essay questions as writing and critical thinking exercises for all levels of writers, and to build their literary analysis skills by requiring textual references throughout the essay.

Differentiation Suggestion: For English learners or struggling writers, strategies that work well include graphic organizers, sentence frames or starters, group work, or oral responses.

Get access to this full Teaching Guide and much more!

• 7,400+ In-Depth Study Guides
• 4,900+ Quick-Read Plot Summaries
• Downloadable PDFs

Scaffolded Essay Questions

Student Prompt: Write a short (1-3 paragraph) response using one of the below bulleted outlines. Cite details from the play over the course of your response that serve as examples and support.

The SuperSummary difference

• 8x more resources than SparkNotes and CliffsNotes combined
• Study Guides you won ' t find anywhere else
• 100+ new titles every month

1. A text’s atmosphere is a feeling created through the details and language used to describe setting.

• How does Orwell establish a dystopian atmosphere early in the novel? ( topic sentence )
• Give at least 3 examples of details, images, or phrasing that support a dystopian atmosphere. Explain how they accomplish this task.
• In your concluding sentence or sentences, explain how the dystopian atmosphere supports the theme Constant Surveillance is Oppressive or Totalitarian Power Diminishes Individuality .

2. Winston believes that there is something essentially different about the impact the Party has on proles versus the impact it has on Party members.

• Why does Winston hope the proles will be able to contest the Party’s power? ( topic sentence )

Don't Miss Out!

Access Teaching Guide Now

Related Titles

By George Orwell

Animal Farm

George Orwell

Burmese Days

Coming Up for Air

Down and Out in Paris and London

Homage To Catalonia

Keep the Aspidistra Flying

Politics and the English Language

Shooting an Elephant

Such, Such Were the Joys

The Road to Wigan Pier

Why I Write

Featured Collections

Audio Study Guides

View Collection

Banned Books Week

British Literature

Brothers & Sisters

Fantasy & Science Fiction Books (High...

Goodreads Reading Challenge

by George Orwell

• 1984 Summary

The novel's protagonist, Winston Smith , is a citizen of Oceania, one of the world's three superstates (along with Eurasia and Eastasia). It is the year 1984, and Winston lives in Airstrip One, which used to be known as Great Britain. Winston is a member of the Party, which rules Oceania under the principles of Ingsoc (English Socialism). Oceania is an oligarchy, under hierarchical rule. The Party consists of Inner Party members, who are the ruling elite, and regular Party members, who are citizens of Oceania. Outside of the Party are the proles, non-Party members and simple people who live in poverty and are free from Party regulations. The Party's leader is Big Brother , and there are massive images of his kind visage, complete with dark hair and a substantial mustache, displayed throughout London, some accompanied by the words "Big Brother is Watching You." The Party's three slogans are: "War is Peace," "Freedom is Slavery," and "Ignorance is Strength."

Winston lost his parents and little sister during the Revolutionary period that destroyed capitalism and instituted Ingsoc in Oceania. He was placed in a Party orphanage and integrated into the Party system. Now he works in the Records Department of the Ministry of Truth, which handles all Party publications and propaganda, altering previously published Party publications to ensure that the Party's version of the Past is never questioned. Such alterations often remove a person from history, or make previously flawed predictions accurate. The other three ministries are the Ministry of Love, which handles all Party prisoners, the Ministry of Peace, which handles war, and the Ministry of Plenty, which manages the production of Party goods, including Victory cigarettes, Victory gin, and Victory coffee, all of which are of extremely poor quality.

Winston has never quite accepted the principles of Ingsoc and the Party. He believes in an unalterable past, and finds Party politics reprehensible. Winston wishes for privacy, intimacy, freedom and love, but cannot express any of this in the open for fear of death. Such thoughts constitute "throughtcrimes," which are highly punishable offenses resulting in arrest, imprisonment, torture, and often death.

When the book opens, Winston is at home during his lunch break. He has returned to his apartment in the Victory Mansions, a dilapidated Party housing building, to write in a diary, a relic of the past he obtained from an old junk shop. Winston's apartment is meager, and like every other Party member's home, contains a telescreen. The telescreen transmits Party information and propaganda, and also allows the Thought Police to watch and listen to Party members at all times. In Oceania, there is no such thing as privacy. Winston is fortunate to have a small nook in his apartment out of the view of the telescreen, and it is in this nook that he begins to write in his diary, despite his overwhelming fear of being caught. Undoubtedly, Winston will eventually be caught, imprisoned, and tortured by the Thought Police. For now, however, he chooses to forge ahead with his rebellion.

Winston writes of various memories, all related to the Party and his life. Many include violent imagery, which is quite common in the age of Oceania, and reveal anti-Party feelings. Winston clearly does not subscribe to Party doctrine. Winston is briefly interrupted at one point by a knock on his door. At first he panics, thinking he has already been caught, but it is only his neighbor, Mrs. Parsons , who needs help unclogging her sink. Winston obliges, and interacts briefly with Mrs. Parsons' two hellish children who are members of the Spies and Youth League, and clearly powerfully indoctrinated in the ways of the Party. Winston predicts that eventually these children will turn their loyal, simple, innocent parents into the Thought Police. Such tragedies, it seems, are quite common.

Winston returns to his diary, and in one of his reveries reflecting on the past and his memories and dreams, finds himself writing "DOWN WITH BIG BROTHER" in large letters over and over on the page. Eventually, time runs out and Winston must return to work, which he enjoys. Once Winston found a newspaper clipping among his daily assignments that proved the innocence of three men: Jones, Aaronson, and Rutherford. In examining the clipping, he knew it meant the Party was wrong, and that he had real evidence of an accurate version of the past. Rather than risk discovery, however, he destroyed the clipping, placing it in a memory hole that sucked it into the building's internal furnaces.

At the Ministry of Truth Winston is surrounded by loyal Party members, and is always on guard to prevent his true feelings from being perceived by others. At work, Winston sits through the daily Two Minutes Hate, which rails against Oceania's enemy, Eurasia, and the supposed leader of the opposition movement, Emmanuel Goldstein. The propaganda is powerful, and the people around him begin shouting at the screen. Of course, Winston must join in to avoid suspicion.

Finding himself increasingly curious about the past, Winston wanders the streets, among the proles. He believes that if there is hope for a successful rebellion, it lies in the proles. Winston meets an old man in a prole pub and questions him about life before the Revolution. To his frustration, the man focuses on his own personal memories rather than on the generalities and conceptual differences Winston is interested in. Winston returns to the junk shop where he bought his diary and purchases a glass paperweight with a piece of coral inside. The proprietor, a kind old man named Mr. Charrington , shows him a room above the shop and Winston thinks about what it might be like to rent it out and live among old things, free from the constant presence of the telescreen.

At work and on his walk, Winston sees a dark-haired girl who is seemingly a violently loyal Party member and apparently has taken notice of him. He fears she is a member of the Thought Police. One day, at the Ministry of Truth, the girl slips him a note after falling down in the hallway, requiring Winston's assistance. The note says "I love you." Winston is astounded, but extremely excited by the possibility of a love affair. The affair must be secret, as the Party is entirely against any sort of sexual pleasure. In fact, sexual repression is a tenet of Ingsoc. The Party must approve every marriage, and it is unacceptable for a man and a woman to express any physical attraction for one another. All energy must be devoted to the Party. Winston was once in such a marriage. His wife Katharine was a frigid, mindless woman who was extremely loyal to the Party, but thought sex was a vile activity. However, she regularly scheduled times for her and Winston to make love, calling it her "duty to the Party." She had been taught from childhood that she must bear children.

With a great deal of effort to remain undetected, the girl finally tells Winston where and how they can meet. On a Sunday afternoon, he travels into the country, as per Julia 's instructions, to meet her in a secluded clearing in a wooded area. Finally, they can speak. Winston learns that her name is Julia, they discuss their beliefs regarding the Party, and they begin their love affair. At one point, Winston notices that the secluded spot she has led them to exactly matches a place he constantly sees in his dreams that he has termed the Golden Country.

Winston and Julia, who has a knack for finding abandoned locales and for obtaining black market goods such as real coffee, bread and sugar, continue to meet in secret. They are limited to interacting only in public places and having only the most minimal conversations, but the two discover a mutual hatred of the Party and eventually fall in love. Winston believes that it is possible to overthrow the Party, while Julia is satisfied simply living a double life. On the surface, she is loyal to the extreme, a member of the Junior Anti-Sex League, a volunteer in many Party activities, and a vocal participant in loyalty-testing events such as the Two Minutes Hate. On the inside, she thinks of it all as a game. She hates the Party and all it stands for, but knows she can do nothing to change it.

Eventually Winston rents the room above Mr. Charrington's flat. Winston and Julia meet often in the room, which is simply furnished, with an old twelve-hour clock (the Party uses twenty-four hour time), and a picture of an old London church, St. Clement's Dane. Mr. Charrington taught him the first lines of an old poem about the church, "Oranges and lemons say the bells of St. Clement's," and Julia knows a few more lines that her grandfather taught her when she was very small. Outside their window, a middle-aged prole woman is constantly hanging her wash and singing simple prole songs, many of which have been created by machines in the Ministry of Truth specifically for the proles.

Another Party member suddenly takes on an important role in Winston's life. Winston has always noticed O'Brien at the Ministry of Truth. He seems to be an intelligent man, and Winston believes in his heart that O'Brien feels the same way he does about the Party. Once, during the Two Minutes Hate, the two men locked eyes and Winston felt sure of O'Brien's thoughts. In a dream, Winston once heard someone tell him, "We will meet in the place where there is no darkness," and he believes the voice to have been O'Brien's. For Winston, O'Brien represents the possibility of an underground movement. Perhaps the Brotherhood, led my Emmanuel Goldstein, is real.

O'Brien approaches Winston at work under the pretense of discussing the Tenth Edition of the Newspeak Dictionary (Newspeak is the official language of Oceania, and its goal is to reduce and simplify vocabulary). O'Brien gives Winston his home address, supposedly so he can come pick up an advance copy of the new book. Winston takes the slip of paper with amazement. He knows that O'Brien has approached him because he is part of the underground movement. His true path towards rebellion has begun.

After some time, Winston and Julia visit O'Brien, an Inner Party member who has a lush apartment, a servant, and the freedom to turn off his telescreen. Winston renounces the Party and discusses his belief in the Brotherhood. O'Brien welcomes Winston and Julia into the Brotherhood and tells them that they must be willing to do anything to work towards its cause. They agree, but say that they will not do anything that would prevent them from seeing each other ever again. O'Brien tells Winston that he will give him a copy of Goldstein's book, and outlines a complicated version of events that will lead toward the exchange. Winston leaves after a final toast with O'Brien, in which Winston finishes O'Brien's statement, saying that they "will meet in the place with no darkness."

During Hate Week, the Party's enemy becomes Eastasia rather than Eurasia, and Winston must spend a great deal of time at work, sometimes even staying overnight, to "correct" all Party publications previously referring to war with Eurasia. The Party is at war with Eastasia, and has always been at war with Eastasia. In the midst of Hate Week, a man brings Winston a brief case, suggests that he dropped it, and leaves. The book is inside. When he has finally completed the Hate Week corrections, Winston escapes to Mr. Charrington's apartment and begins to read. Julia arrives, and he reads aloud to her about the history of Oceania, capitalism versus totalitarianism, and the main goals of the Party. Most of this information Winston already knows, but he finds it helpful to read it in the detailed, clear words of Emmanuel Goldstein.

Winston and Julia eventually fall asleep. The wake hours later, and go to stand at the window. Winston repeats his oft-stated phrase, "We are the dead." Suddenly, a voice coming from the wall echoes him, "You are the dead." There is a telescreen hidden behind the picture of St. Clement's Dane. They are caught. The Thought Police storm the room. Mr. Charrington walks in, and it becomes clear that he is a member of the Thought Police. He has been disguised as a kind old man, but is far younger than Winston imagined, with different hair and eyes. Winston and Julia are arrested, separated, and brought to the Ministry of Love.

While in a holding cell, Winston sees men from the Ministry of Truth come and go. Each has been arrested for thoughtcrime. Parsons arrives, and it turns out that his daughter turned him in, claiming to have heard him say "Down with Big Brother" in his sleep. Winston's prediction, it appears, was sadly accurate. In his holding cell, Winston sees a great deal of violence, and notices guards constantly referring to "Room 101," a phrase that seems to instill great fear in some of the prisoners.

Eventually, O'Brien arrives. It becomes clear that he was never part of the underground movement, but actually works in the Ministry of Love. Winston's entire interaction with O'Brien was a ruse. Winston is removed from the holding cell, and his torture begins. At first the torture is extremely violent, and he is forced to admit to a litany of crimes he did not commit, including murder and espionage. Eventually, the torture becomes less violent and O'Brien takes over. He begins to break Winston's spirit, telling him that his memory is flawed and that he is insane. Winston's discussions with O'Brien dwell on the nature of the past and reality, and reveal much about the Party's approach to those concepts. The Party, O'Brien explains with a lunatic intensity, seeks absolute power, for power's own sake. This is why it will always be successful, is always right, and will ultimately control the entire world. Winston cannot argue; every time he does, he is faced with obstinate logical fallacies, a completely different system of reasoning that runs counter to all reason. Winston believes in a past that never existed, and is hounded by false memories. To be cured, Winston must overcome his own insanity and win the war against his own mind.

Little by little, O'Brien shows Winston, with the use of electric shock machines, beatings and starvation, the way of the Party. He forces Winston to accept that if the Party says so, two plus two equals five. Winston had once written in his diary that freedom meant being able to say that two plus two is four. His final attempt to argue with O'Brien ends in O'Brien showing Winston himself in the mirror. Winston is beyond horrified to see that he has turned into a sickly, disgusting sack of bones, beaten into a new face. Broken to the core, Winston finally submits to his re-education. He is no longer beaten, is fed at regular intervals, is allowed to sleep (though the lights, of course, never go out), and begins to regain his health. Although seemingly making progress in accepting the reality of the Party, Winston is still holding onto the last remaining kernel of himself and his humanity: his love for Julia. This comes out when, in the midst of a dream, Winston cries aloud, "Julia! Julia! Julia, my love! Julia!"

O'Brien's last efforts with Winston are focused on forcing him to betray Julia. He takes Winston to Room 101, containing the worst thing in the world, which is different for everyone. For Winston, "the worst thing in the world" is a rat. Winston is tied to a chair, and O'Brien begins to attach a mask/cage contraption containing huge, hungry, carnivorous rats to his face. Winston feels a desperate, deep, panicked fear. He cannot take it, and finally screams for O'Brien to put someone else in his place - anyone, even Julia. O'Brien has succeeded.

Winston, a damaged, changed, empty shell of a man, is released into the world. In his new life, he sees Julia once, by chance, but they are no longer in love. Each betrayed the other, and prison changed them powerfully. There is no hope for their relationship. Winston obtains a somewhat trivial, meaningless job that pays surprisingly well. He spends his time at the Chestnut Tree Cafe drinking Victory Gin and playing chess. His life is buried in gin. In the final pages of the novel, we find Winston in his regular seat at the cafe, drinking gin, playing chess, and waiting for a report from the front in Central Africa, where Eurasia (Oceania was always at war with Eurasia) has invaded. He is excited about the report, because with this invasion, Eurasia might actually be able to break Oceania's line of defense and put the entire nation at risk for takeover. A Eurasian success in Central Africa might mean the end of the Party. Before the report comes, Winston suddenly recalls a very happy day in his childhood spent playing board games with his mother and little sister. He pushes it out of his mind, realizing it is a false memory and resolving to allow fewer of those to creep up on him. Eventually, the report reveals that Oceania has succeeded in repelling the Eurasian advance. There is jubilation on the telescreen and in the streets. Staring into the eyes of a poster of Big Brother, Winston realizes that he knew this news would come. With tears dripping down his face, Winston realizes he has finally completed the rehabilitation he started in the Ministry of Love. He loves Big Brother.

1984 Questions and Answers

The Question and Answer section for 1984 is a great resource to ask questions, find answers, and discuss the novel.

Describe O’Briens apartment and lifestyle. How do they differ from Winston’s?

From the text:

It was only on very rare occasions that one saw inside the dwelling-places of the Inner Party, or even penetrated into the quarter of the town where they lived. The whole atmosphere of the huge block of flats, the richness and...

What was the result of Washington exam

Sorry, I'm not sure what you are asking here.

how is one put into the inner or outer party in the book 1984

The Outer Party is a huge government bureaucracy. They hold positions of trust but are largely responsible for keeping the totalitarian structure of Big Brother functional. The Outer Party numbers around 18 to 19 percent of the population and the...

Study Guide for 1984

1984 study guide contains a biography of George Orwell, literature essays, quiz questions, major themes, characters, and a full summary and analysis.

• Character List

Essays for 1984

1984 essays are academic essays for citation. These papers were written primarily by students and provide critical analysis of 1984 by George Orwell.

• The Reflection of George Orwell
• Totalitarian Collectivism in 1984, or, Big Brother Loves You
• Sex as Rebellion
• Class Ties: The Dealings of Human Nature Depicted through Social Classes in 1984
• 1984: The Ultimate Parody of the Utopian World

Lesson Plan for 1984

• About the Author
• Study Objectives
• Common Core Standards
• Introduction to 1984
• Relationship to Other Books
• Bringing in Technology
• Notes to the Teacher
• Related Links
• 1984 Bibliography

Wikipedia Entries for 1984

• Introduction
• Writing and publication

George Orwell’s “1984” Analysis

Introduction / thesis, analytical part.

• Bibliography:

Ever since George Orwell’s famous novel “1984” has been published in 1949, its semiotic significance was being discussed from a variety of political and sociological perspectives, with most literary critics concluding that “1984” was meant to increase people’s awareness as to the sheer wickedness of Communism, as a political doctrine. In his article “Utopia, Dystopia, and the Middle Class in George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four”, Robert Paul Resch states: “Both admirers and detractors alike have tended to assume Orwell’s notion of totalitarianism to be straightforward and thus unworthy of any particular theoretical reflection” (1997, 138). However, this Orwell’s novel is not being concerned with the discussion of totalitarianism’s evils as much as it is being concerned with exposing what happens when society’s functioning gets to be adjusted to correspond to purely utopian theories that actively deny people their right to be endowed with natural instincts.

Therefore, we can say that “1984” does not only contain many ideological but also philosophical implications, which explains the fact that Orwell’s insight onto the very essence of totalitarianism remains fully valid even today, especially given the fact that the oppressive ideology of political correctness is now being forcibly imposed upon citizens of Western countries despite their will, as we speak. In this paper we will aim at exploring this thesis even further, while bringing readers’ attention to the fact that if self-appointed “experts on tolerance” are going to be allowed to proceed with their agenda of suppressing the truth, the horrors of “1984” will come to reality in very near future.

One of the most memorable aspects of Orwell’s anti-utopia is the fact that in it, author was able to predict the emergence of truly effective totalitarianism as such that would be closely associated with the invention of a new language “newspeak”, designed to serve the needs of a ruling party, while depriving ordinary citizens of even a hypothetical possibility to express their contempt with surrounding reality: “Whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought. In the end we shall make thought crime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it” (Orwell, 22). And, as we are all well aware of – nowadays, the hawks of political correctness apply a great amount of effort in trying to convince people that under no circumstances should they be resorting to utilization of emotionally charged words, due to these words’ often offensive connotation.

In his article “The Age of Newspeak”, Lee Congdon points out to the fact that Orwell’s “newspeak” is actually the part of today’s politically correct realities: “Although some Americans dismiss “political correctness” as an aberration, its purveyors have succeeded in replacing standard English with a form of “newspeak”… Universities have attempted to impose speech codes in order to outlaw language that makes some students “uncomfortable” or that contradicts doctrines that, because they are difficult to defend in argument, must be insulated from criticism” (2002). Nowadays, the promoters’ of “tolerance” willingness to alter English language often assumes truly comical subtleties. For example, according to neo-Liberal whackos in governmental offices, the children’s fairy tale about Snow White and Seven Dwarfs should be referred to as “The Story and Seven Vertically Challenged Males and one Caucasian Female”.

Yet, there is nothing funny about these people’s intention to act as thought police’s officials. Whatever the improbable it might sound, but they seriously believe that there is no existential difference between the representatives of opposite genders, which in its turn, causes them to actively strive to undermine the very concept of gender differentiation. As of today, men try not to even look at women while in the same elevator, for example, simply because they are being utterly terrified of a prospect of losing their jobs on the account of “sexual harassment”. It might very well be the case that in very near future, men will be required to refer to women as “representatives of vaginal group” or something like that.

One cannot help but to draw a parallel between anti-sexist hysteria, which continue to gain a momentum in today’s Western countries, and governmentally sponsored anti-sexist hysteria, described in “1984”: “Sexual intercourse was to be looked on as a slightly disgusting minor operation, like having an enema. This again was never put into plain words, but in an indirect way it was rubbed into every Party member from childhood onwards. There were even organizations such as the Junior Anti-Sex League, which advocated complete celibacy for both sexes” (Orwell, 27).

One might wonder as to how come the contemporary enforcers of “newspeak” were able to convince many citizens that it is namely the neo-Liberal political agenda that should be considered as the only legitimate one? The answer to this question is simple – the hawks of political correctness have succeeded in taking over Western Medias in the same manner that members of Inner Party in Orwell’s “1984” have taken over the Medias in Airstrip One, while turning them into the ultimate tool of ideological brainwashing. In Orwell’s novel, Medias served only one purpose – perpetrating the most blatant lies 24/7: “War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength” (Orwell, 3). If we take a closer look at how Medias operate into contemporary equivalent of Airstrip One – a politically correct Britain, it will appear that the foremost principle of their functioning is also being solely concerned with perpetrating lies and with promoting intellectual decadence.

For example, it now being estimated that, during the course of so-called London’s “race riots” of 2001 and 2003, close to 500.000 Londoners and the residents of London’s suburbia had openly expressed their growing concerns about the process of Britain’s Islamization. And yet, British mainstream Medias still refer to these events as “racist provocation”, “crime against the spirit of tolerance” and “neo-nazi conspiracy”, even though that people who participated in mass rallies against the process of their country being gradually turned into Northern Pakistan, were ordinary citizens, who simply got fed up with newly arrived Muslim immigrants’ tendency to “celebrate diversity” by gang-raping White women and bringing explosives to London’s subway.

Another example – in 1999, when NATO planes were bombing innocent civilians in Yugoslavia, so that world’s attention would be diverted from Clinton-Lewinsky affair, British Medias used to provide people with a live “entertainment” of buildings being destroyed and people being blown to pieces, much like Airstrip One’s Medias used to expose citizens to the graphic sights of destruction and death: “Then you saw a lifeboat full of children with a helicopter hovering over it… Then the helicopter planted a 20 kilo bomb in among them terrific flash and the boat went all to matchwood. Then there was a wonderful shot of a child’s arm going up up up right up into the air a helicopter with a camera in its nose must have followed it up and there was a lot of applause from the party seats” (Orwell, 5). The reason for this is simple – throughout the course of history, it was in enforcers’ of ideological dictatorship best interests to keep ordinary citizens intellectually marginalized. And, the best way to achieve it is make sure that crowds never lack “bread and entertainment” – the more graphic and violent such entertainment is, the better.

However, despite having been subjected to politically correct brainwashing for a long time, many citizens in Western countries were still able to retain their ability to think in terms of logic. And, such their ability poses clear and immediate danger to those who work on behalf of New World Order’s secret bosses. This is exactly the reason why neo-Liberal governments in Western countries are being in such a rush to introduce more and more of so-called “hate speech” laws.

Nowadays, in such countries as Britain, France, Germany and Canada, one can easily be sentenced to 3-5 years in jail for simply stating that Jews were not only the people who had suffered during the course of WW2 (the “crime of historical revisionism”). The editorial “Holocaust Denier Irving is Jailed”, available on the web site of BBC News, leave no doubt as to validity of earlier suggestion: “British historian David Irving has been found guilty in Vienna of denying the Holocaust of European Jewry and sentenced to three years in prison” (2006). Why would the representatives of world’s Plutocracy be so terrified with people’s absolutely legitimate strive to reexamine the history? Orwell’s novel provides us with the ultimate answer to this question: “Who controls the past,’ ran the Party slogan, ‘controls the future: who controls the present controls the past” (Orwell, 15). As we all know, the representatives of “chosen people” have now attained a status of “holy cows”, simply because they were able to turn the issue of Holocaust into a profitable industry.

Nowadays, even a slightest criticism of Israeli genocidal policies in Palestine is being considered the “act of anti-Semitism” – a punishable criminal offence. If Holocaust did not occur, Jews would have invented it, because the “historical guilt” on the part of “goyms” benefits them in so many ways – Germany alone pays Israel $700 millions annually in reparations. In order for the “chosen people” to be able to proceed with their traditional activities of money laundering, promoting sexual perversion and destroying the economies of whole countries, the issue of Holocaust simply cannot be reexamined – those who control past, control future.

Thus, it will not be an exaggeration, on our part, to suggest that Orwell’s “1984” should not be considered as much as the literary insight onto the probable future – this novel is actually about the present. People, who read the novel in fifties, would naturally come to conclusion that “1984” was the ultimate criticism of USSR, which explains why in Soviet Union Orwell’s novel was officially banned. However, despite the fact that in 1991 Soviet Union had collapsed just like a stack of cards, we now have its ideological descendant – European Union.

In his article “Former Soviet Dissident Warns for EU Dictatorship”, Paul Belien quotes a former Soviet dissident Vladimir Bukovksy, who had suggested that slowly but surely, EU transforms itself into the miniature replica of Soviet Union: “The Soviet Union used to be a state run by ideology. Today’s ideology of the European Union is social-democratic, statist, and a big part of it is also political correctness… When you look at the European Commission it looks like the Politburo. I mean it does so exactly, except for the fact that the Commission now has 25 members and the Politburo usually had 13 or 15 members. Apart from that they are exactly the same, unaccountable to anyone, not directly elected by anyone at all” (2006). EU’s unelected bureaucrats really do believe that it is up to them to tell the citizens of European countries not only how should they live their lives but even what kind of thoughts they are allowed to keep in their minds – the similarity between Orwell’s vision of a grim future and today’s realities of living in politically correct Europe are being just too obvious not to be noticed.

Whereas; in “1984”, people were expected to openly express their love to Big Brother, in EU, people are being expected to openly express their love to countless “Holocaust survivors”, who were born in fifties and sixties. Whereas, in “1984”, Medias used to mislead citizens about the history of wars with Eastasia and Euroasia, in EU, Medias mislead citizens as to the history of WW1 and WW2. Whereas; in Orwell’s novel, it were namely the members of Inner Party, entitled with undisputed power of exercising control over ordinary people’s lives, in EU, this function is being performed by unelected and often anonymous bureaucrats.

Just like what it used to be the case with Oceania’s citizens, people in countries of EU simply cannot afford the luxury of being honest with their friends and neighbours – all it takes for an individual in today’s “tolerant” Europe to be instantly fired from work and to face the prospect of criminal prosecution is to suggest that Europe might not be benefiting a whole lot from the hordes of immigrants from Third World being allowed to settle here.

Apparently, the fact that Orwell novel’s many implications seem to be clearly concerned with the present, is being slowly realised by promoters of political correctness, which is exactly the reason why it might only be the matter of time, before “1984” will be banned from public libraries in Western countries, just as it used to be the case in Soviet Union. In her article “Cultural Sensitivity and Political Correctness: The Linguistic Problem of Naming”, Edna Andrews says: “There are instances of censorship not only in contemporary American media, but also in educational systems, where not only are teachers restricted in their speech, but literary works, such as Salinger’s “Catcher in the Rye” and Orwell’s “1984”. The reasoning behind the exclusion of such works from the classroom generally entails a belief that the “word” is so powerful that an inappropriate one can harm innocent children and destroy public morals” (1996, 396). Andrews’ suggestion does not appear being altogether deprived of rationale – in today’s Western countries, which suffer under the yoke of neo-Liberal dictatorship, the criticism of Communism is not being tolerated, simply because the closer look at hook-nosed proponents of neo-Liberal agenda reveals them as being nothing but spiritual and often biological descendants of Communist commissars. This is exactly the reason why children in American schools are now being taught to think of Hitler as the “embodiment of evil”, while being simultaneously indoctrinated to refer to Marx, Lenin, Trotsky and Stalin as simply the “misunderstood geniuses of workers’ liberation”, even though that the magnitude of Communist atrocities cannot even be compared to that of Nazis.

The conclusion of this paper can be formulated as follows: George Orwell’s novel “1984” is an absolute must for reading, because this literary masterpiece does not simply provide us with the better understanding as to what world would have been like, had Commies succeeded with their original intention of conquering the whole planet, but it also specifies techniques, used for ideological brainwashing. However, the greatest benefit of reading “1984” is the fact that this novel contains a clue as to the fact that the proper functioning of just about any utopian society cannot be achieved, without such society’s members being turned into brainless robots. This is why “1984” is not being particularly liked by today’s Marxists, who now operate under disguise of neo-Liberal sophisticates – apparently, they are being well aware of the full spectrum of novel’s ideological, political and philosophical implications. Therefore, “1984” must be referred to as to what it really is – one of 20 th century’s most important literary masterpieces, the publishing of which had revealed the true essence of Communism; thus, contributing a lot to the process of this bloodthirsty ideology being deprived of its popular appeal.

Bibliography

Andrews, Edna “Cultural Sensitivity and Political Correctness: The Linguistic Problem of Naming”. American Speech 71.4 (1996): 389-404. Print.

Belien, Paul “Former Soviet Dissident Warns for EU Dictatorship”. 2006.  The Brussels Journal . Web.

Congdon, Lee “The Age of Newspeak”. 2002. Virginia Institute for Public  Policy . Web.

Goldstein, Philip “Orwell as a (Neo) Conservative: The Reception of 1984”.  The Journal of the Midwest Modern Language Association 33.1 (2000): 44-57. Print.

“ Holocaust Denier Irving is jailed ”. 2006. BBC News . Web.

Lutman, Stephen “Orwell’s Patriotism”. Journal of Contemporary History  2.2 (1967): 149-158. Print.

Nagel, Joane “Ethnicity and Sexuality”. Annual Review of Sociology 26.5 (2000):107-133. Print.

Newfield, Christopher “What Was Political Correctness? Race, the Right, and Managerial Democracy in the Humanities”. Critical Inquiry 19.2 (1993): 308-336. Print.

Nincic, Miroslav & Nincic, Donna “Race, Gender, and War”. Journal of  Peace Research 39.5 (2002): 547-568. Print.

Orwell, George “1984”. Wall Street Cockpit . Web.

Resch, Robert “Utopia, Dystopia, and the Middle Class in George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four”. Boundary 2 24.1 (1997): 137-176. Print.

Simms, Valerie “A Reconsideration of Orwell’s 1984: The Moral Implications of Despair”. Ethics 84.4 (1974): 292-306. Print.

Cite this paper

• Chicago (N-B)
• Chicago (A-D)

StudyCorgi. (2021, November 10). George Orwell’s “1984” Analysis. https://studycorgi.com/george-orwells-1984-analysis/

"George Orwell’s “1984” Analysis." StudyCorgi , 10 Nov. 2021, studycorgi.com/george-orwells-1984-analysis/.

StudyCorgi . (2021) 'George Orwell’s “1984” Analysis'. 10 November.

1. StudyCorgi . "George Orwell’s “1984” Analysis." November 10, 2021. https://studycorgi.com/george-orwells-1984-analysis/.

StudyCorgi . "George Orwell’s “1984” Analysis." November 10, 2021. https://studycorgi.com/george-orwells-1984-analysis/.

StudyCorgi . 2021. "George Orwell’s “1984” Analysis." November 10, 2021. https://studycorgi.com/george-orwells-1984-analysis/.

This paper, “George Orwell’s “1984” Analysis”, was written and voluntary submitted to our free essay database by a straight-A student. Please ensure you properly reference the paper if you're using it to write your assignment.

Before publication, the StudyCorgi editorial team proofread and checked the paper to make sure it meets the highest standards in terms of grammar, punctuation, style, fact accuracy, copyright issues, and inclusive language. Last updated: January 25, 2022 .

If you are the author of this paper and no longer wish to have it published on StudyCorgi, request the removal . Please use the “ Donate your paper ” form to submit an essay.

NOW OPEN: 2024 Term Two Enrolments 🎉

Common Module State-Rank Essay Showcase: Nineteen Eighty-Four

The following essay was written by Project Academy English Tutor, Marko Beocanin

Marko Beocanin

99.95 ATAR & 3 x State Ranker

The following essay was written by Project Academy English Teacher, Marko Beocanin.

Marko’s Achievements:

• 8th in NSW for English Advanced (98/100)
• Rank 1 in English Advanced, Extension 1 and Extension 2
• School Captain of Normanhurst Boys High School

Marko kindly agreed to share his essay and thorough annotations to help demystify for HSC students what comprises an upper Band 6 response!

Common Module: Nineteen Eighty-Four Essay Question

Marko’s following essay was written in response to the question:

“The representation of human experiences makes us more aware of the intricate nature of humanity.” In your response, discuss this statement with detailed reference to George Orwell’s ‘Nineteen Eighty-Four’.

State-Ranking Common Module Essay Response

George Orwell’s 1949 Swiftian satire Nineteen Eighty-Four invites us to appreciate the intricate nature of humanity by representing how the abuse of power by totalitarian governments degrades our individual and collective experiences. (Link to rubric through individual/collective experiences, and a clear cause and effect argument: totalitarian governance -> degraded human experience. Also, comments on the genre of Swiftian satire. Value!) Orwell explores how oppressive authorities suppress the intricate societal pillars of culture, expression and freedom to maintain power. He then reveals how this suppression brutalises individual human behaviour and motivations because it undermines emotion and intricate thought. (Link to rubric through ‘human behaviour and motivations’, and extended cause and effect in which the first paragraph explores the collective ‘cause’ and the second paragraph explores the individual ‘effect’. This is an easy way to structure your arguments whilst continuously engaging with the rubric!) Ultimately, he argues that we must resist the political apathy that enables oppressive governments to maintain power and crush human intricacy. Therefore, his representation of human experiences not only challenges us to consider the intricate nature of humanity, but exhorts us to greater political vigilance so we can preserve it. (Concluding sentence that broadens the scope of the question and reaffirms the purpose of the text).

Orwell makes us aware of the intricate nature of humanity by representing how totalitarian authorities suppress intricate collective experiences of culture, expression and freedom in order to assert control. (This is the ‘collective’ paragraph – a cause and effect argument that relates the question to the loss of human intricacy in the collective as a result of totalitarian rule). His bleak vision was informed by Stalin’s USSR: a regime built upon the fabrication of history in Stalin’s ‘cult of personality’, and ruthlessly enforced by the NKVD. (Specific context – an actual specific regime is named and some details about its enforcement are given). The symbolic colourlessness and propaganda-poster motif he uses to describe London reflects the loss of human intricacy and culture under such leadership: “there seemed to be no colour in anything, except the posters that were plastered everywhere.” (First example sets up the world of the text, and the degraded collective experience). Orwell uses the telescreens, dramatically capitalised “BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU” posters and allusions to Stalin in Big Brother’s “black-moustachio’d face” as metonyms for how governmental surveillance dominates both physical and cultural collective experiences. Winston’s metatextual construction of the fictitious “Comrade Ogilvy” serves as a symbol for the vast, worthless masses of information produced by totalitarian governments to undermine the intricacy of real human history: “Comrade Ogilvy, who had never existed…would exist just as authentically, and upon the same evidence, as Charlemagne or Julius Caesar.” Similarly, Orwell’s satirical representation of Newspeak ignites the idea that political slovenliness causes self-expression to degrade, which in turn destroys our capacity for intricate thought and resistance: “we shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it.” (The examples above prove that the government’s leadership style truly is totalitarian, and that it results in a loss of intricacy and ‘humanity’ in the collective. It’s good to cover a variety of examples that explore different facets of the collective – for example, the first example establishes the extreme surveillance, the second example establishes the loss of ‘truth’/history, and the third example establishes the loss of language). The political bitterness that marks Nineteen Eighty-Four as a Swiftian satire (This is a link to the ‘Swiftian’ term used in the thesis statement. It’s important to refer back to any descriptive terms you use in your thesis) ultimately culminates in O’Brien’s monologue, where Orwell juxtaposes the politicised verb “abolish” to symbols of human intricacy, “we shall abolish the orgasm…there will be no art, no literature, no science…when we are omnipotent”, to express how totalitarian rulers suppress collective experiences to gain metaphoric omnipotence. Thus, Orwell makes us aware of the intricate nature of humanity by representing a future in which totalitarian governments suppress it. (A linking sentence that ties it all back to the question and rephrases the point)

Orwell then argues that the effect of this suppression is a loss of human intricacy that brutalises society and devalues individual experiences. (Cause and effect argument that links collective suppression to a loss of human intricacy on an individual scale – continuous engagement with the question and the rubric!) Orwell’s exposure to the widespread hysteria of Hitler’s Nazi regime, caused by the Nuremberg Rallies and Joseph Goebbels’ virulent anti-semitic propaganda, informs his representation of Oceania’s dehumanised masses. (More specific context around the Nazis, and a specific link to how it informed his work) The burlesque Two Minute Hate reveals human inconsistency by representing how even introspective, intelligent characters can be stripped of their intricacy and compassion by the experience of collective hysteria: even Winston wishes to “flog [Julia] to death with a rubber truncheon…ravish her and cut her throat at the moment of climax”, and is only restored by compliance to the Christ-like totalitarian authority, “My-Saviour!”, Big Brother. (A link to the rubric with the ‘human inconsistency’ point) Orwell frequently juxtaposes dehumanising representations of the proles, “the proles are not human beings”, to political sloganism: “As the Party slogan put it: ‘Proles and animals are free’”, to argue that in such a collectively suppressed society, the upper class grow insensitive towards the intricate nature of those less privileged. (It’s important to link the proles into your argument – they’re often forgotten, but they’re a big part of the text!) He asserts that this loss of empathy degrades the authenticity and intricacy of human relationships, characterised by Winson’s paradoxically hyperbolic repulsion towards his wife: “[Katharine] had without exception the most stupid, vulgar, empty mind that he had every encountered”. (Continuous engagement with the question and rubric: make sure to recycle rubric terms – here, done with ‘paradoxically’ – and question terms – here, with ‘intricacy’)  Winston’s “betrayal” of Julia symbolises how totalitarianism ultimately brutalises individuals by replacing their compassion for intricate ideals such as love with selfish pragmatism: “Do it to Julia…Tear her face off, strip her to the bones. Not me!” Therefore, Orwell makes us more aware of the intricate nature of humanity by demonstrating how it can be robbed by suppressive governments and collective hysteria. (A linking sentence that sums up the paragraph).

By making us aware of how totalitarian governments suppress meaningful human experiences both individually and collectively, Orwell challenges us to resist so we can preserve our intricate nature. (This third paragraph discusses Orwell’s purpose as a composer. This can in general be a helpful way to structure paragraphs: Collective, Individual, Purpose) Orwell’s service in the 1930s Spanish Civil War as part of the Republican militia fighting against fascist-supported rebels positions him to satirise the political apathy of his audience. (Integration of personal context is useful here to justify Orwell’s motivations. It’s also a lot fresher than just including another totalitarian regime Orwell was exposed to) Orwell alludes to this through the metaphor of Winston’s diarising as an anomalous individual experience of resistance, ““[Winston] was a lonely ghost uttering a truth that nobody would ever hear,” which highlights how his intricate nature persists even in a suppressive society. Often, Orwell meta-fictively addresses his own context, as “a time when thought is free…when truth exists”, to establish an imperative to preserve our intricate human nature while we still can. The Julia romance trope (It’s good to include terms such as ‘trope’ which reflect your understanding of narrative structure and the overall form of the work.) represents how Winston’s gradual rejection of his political apathy empowered him to experience an authentic, intricately human relationship that subverts his totalitarian society: “the gesture with which [Julia] had thrown her clothes aside…[belonged] to an ancient time. Winston woke up with the word ‘Shakespeare’ on his lips.” Orwell juxtaposes Julia’s sexuality to Shakespeare, an immediately-recognisable metonym for culture and history, to argue that human intricacy can only be restored by actively resisting the dehumanising influence of the government. Orwell also represents Winston’s desensitised and immediate devotion to the Brotherhood to reflect how the preservation of human intricacy is a cause worth rebelling for, even by paradoxically unjust means: “[Winston was] prepared to commit murder…acts of sabotage which may cause the deaths of hundreds of innocent people…throw sulphuric acid in a child’s face.” (More chronological examples that show Winston’s transformation throughout the text. It’s useful to explore and contrast those who resist with those who don’t resist, and how just the act of resistance in some way restores our humanity! That’s why this paragraph comes after the ‘brutalised individual experience’ paragraph) However, Orwell ultimately asserts that it is too late for Winston to meaningfully restore humanity’s intricate nature, and concludes the text with his symbolic death and acceptance of the regime, “[Winston] had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Brother.” (It’s important to remember that Orwell ends the text so miserably so that he can motivate his audiences not to do the same thing). The futility of this ending ignites the idea that we must not only be aware of our intricate nature, but must actively resist oppressive governments while we still can in order to preserve it. (A linking sentence that ties the paragraph together and justifies the futility of the ending)

Therefore, Orwell’s representation of human experiences in Nineteen Eighty-Four encourages us to reflect personally on our own intricate human nature, and challenges us to fight to preserve it. (Engages with the question (through the reflection point), and includes Orwell’s purpose as a composer). His depiction of a totalitarian government’s unchecked assertion of power on human culture and freedom, and the brutalising impact this has on individual and collective experiences, ultimately galvanises us to reject political apathy. (Your argument summaries can often be combined into a sentence or two in the conclusion now that the marker knows what you’re talking about. This reinforces the cause and effect structure as well.) Thus, the role of storytelling for Orwell is not only to make us more aware of our intricate nature, but to prove that we must actively resist oppressive governments while we still can in order to preserve it. (The clincher! It’s often useful to add “not only” in your final sentence to reinforce the massive scope of the text)

If reading this essay has helped you, you may also enjoy reading Marko’s ultimate guide to writing 20/20 HSC English essays .

P.S If you have any questions about aceing HSC English , you are welcome to learn from Marko and join one of Project Academy’s HSC English classes on a 3 week trial .

Maximise Your Chances Of Coming First At School

Trial any Project Academy course for 3 weeks.

NSW's Top 1% Tutors

Unlimited Tutorials

NSW's Most Effective Courses

Access to Project's iPad

Access to Exclusive Resources

Access to Project's Study Space

HSC English Advanced: Textual Conversations - The Tempest and Hag-Seed

Katriel's guide to The Tempest and Hag-Seed in Module A, HSC English Advanced!

English Team

Katriel Tan and Marko Beocanin

How I Achieved a 99.80 ATAR with 8+ Hours of Sleep Every Night

Here are 4 effective HSC study tips from the Vice Captain of Baulkham Hills!

Rishabh Jain

Head of HSC Chemistry

The Fundamental Physics Strategy

Not everything has to be as difficult as Quantum Physics. Here is my short guide to HSC Physics.

Edward Townsend-Medlock

Head of Physics (18' - 22')

Complete Guide to Year 12 HSC Chemistry Module 6 - Acid/Base Reactions

One of the best online resources to learn Mod 6, written by Rishabh, Trisha, and qualified teachers.

Chemistry Team

Trisha Nangia & Rishabh Jain

Class of 1984 playwright receives favorable review of ‘Herself’

A member of the Saint Michael’s Class of 1984 recently premiered a new play in New York City called “Herself.”

“Herself” is the brainchild of Tim McGillicuddy ’84, and is the 25 th year anniversary production of the theatre company The Drilling Company , which is also the producer of Shakespeare in the Parking Lot and Shakespeare in Bryant Park. The play premiered in late March and will run through April 20 at A.R.T’s Gural Theater.

The play, according to Broadway World, is “a comedy in which a prodigal daughter returns to the waterside town of Galway, Ireland to attend the funeral of her alcoholic brother, inherit his pub, face generations of gossip and reconcile with a charismatic parish priest.”

“In the play, a woman named Maureen, prospering in New York, must return to Galway, a coastal town in Ireland for the funeral of her brother, a tavern operator who has just died of alcoholism,” Broadway World writes. “Upon learning that she has inherited his pub, Maureen resolves to restore it as a community heartspot in defiance of the wishes of her father, a millionaire real estate developer who would like to tear it down and start over. She bucks up her spirit and accomplishes the restoration, in the face of local resentment that she deserted her place of origin and tittle-tattle about her family’s past that is complicated by her attraction to the new parish priest.”

The script took three years to write and develop, and over the past year, McGillicuddy tapped his former Saint Michael’s professor, English Professor Emeritus Nick Clary to help with writing and editing the script.

The play is already receiving some critical acclaim, including through a review by Woman Around Town . The author Alix Cohen writes, “This is the kind of play you might assume rendered by Brian Friel – not a comparison of style, but rather one of nuanced character depiction, relatable situation and solid storytelling. A satisfying work of writing and production.”

Related News See more news

April 12, 2024

Biology professor earns international recognition for faculty-student research in ‘the lub lab’.

April 11, 2024

Saint michael’s students share study abroad transformations during global eyes.

April 10, 2024

St. mike’s experiences the solar eclipse together.

Student earns International Scholarship, recognized by U.S. Department of State

25 people from St. Mike’s visit Capitol Hill

Student Spotlight: Kathleen Dean ’26

Follow us on social..

Gen Z wants student loan forgiveness without any accountability. It doesn't work that way.

Blanket cancellation does nothing to combat the problem of the student loan crisis. it would only serve as a further incentive for students to attend colleges they can’t afford..

My generation has a political problem. We gravitate toward quick fixes for massive problems that plague our country. The generation raised on instant gratification, to little surprise, is looking for the same in politics and government.

On no other issue is this more apparent than the student loan crisis. Rather than targeting the root of the problem of federally subsidized student loans, President Joe Biden has instead pushed forward the Band-Aid fix of blanket student debt cancellation in order to score a cheap political win with America's youth. 

On the 2020 campaign trail, candidate Biden championed his plan to "immediately cancel a minimum of $10,000 of student debt per person." That empty promise appears to have worked the first time around, as he captured 65% of the Gen Z vote , compared with Trump’s 31%.

So is it any surprise that Biden's promise to eliminate student debt went on to be one of his administration's major policy moves? That might be why 77% of voters ages 18-29 said student debt relief was a motivating factor for their turnout in the midterm elections.

Gen Z's support for Biden's student debt plan is maddening

On the issue of student loans, Gen Z broadly favors blanket debt cancellation similar to Biden’s proposed plan. Almost 60% of those born in 1997 or later support the plan that has since been struck down by the Supreme Court , compared with just 46% of all voters in swing states.

Maddeningly enough, that same Bloomberg News/Morning Consult survey reveals Gen Z is far less literate on the details of the plan than other generations, with 42% reporting they had heard “not much” or “not at all” of the plan, compared with just 30% of all other voters in swing states.

Why I'm not voting: I'm not voting for Trump or Biden. You want my vote? Choose better candidates.

I struggle to come up with a term to describe my generation on this issue besides “entitled.” Not only are we broadly in favor of other people paying off our debts, a majority of whom do not hold a bachelor's degree or higher, we don’t even have the decency to be more aware of the issue than generations that are more likely to have already paid off their loans.

A sobering truth for young Americans needs to be heard. You do not have the right to demand other people pay off your poor financial decisions. 

Gen Z should push Congress to find a long-term solution

Biden’s plan was not only unwise but also unconstitutional at its core, as highlighted by the Supreme Court when it struck down the plan last June . While I think this course of action is unwise and immoral, Gen Z has a better chance of accomplishing debt relief through Congress, which is responsible for the power of the purse.

Gen Z isn't going away: Don't believe the narrative that Gen Z will vote Biden. My generation is up for grabs.

Blanket cancellation does nothing to combat the problem of the student loan crisis. In fact, it would only serve as a further incentive for students to attend colleges they can’t afford, obtaining degrees that give them little chance of allowing them to pay off the debt they accrued in the process.

Congressional efforts are much better geared toward legislation curtailing the federal student lending programs that have gotten us into this mess in the first place.

The problem is federal involvement in student loans

Our government’s involvement in the student debt crisis is clearly unacceptable. Federal lending programs now offer aid to the vast majority of students.

A 2017 study from the Federal Reserve indicates that for every dollar of federal student loans an institution receives, it's able to raise the cost of attendance by 60 cents. 

In a time when 37% of graduates report being unable to afford their monthly loan repayment , a short-term fix like cancellation will do nothing to prevent future generations from suffering the same fate. Young voters should look to other methods to sway their vote for actual change on the issue, not false promises attempting to bribe them. 

Gen Z should concentrate our efforts on voting for candidates who promise actual change on the issue, or better yet, take personal responsibility for financial decisions. Understanding your financial decision in attending college, rather than blaming politicians for not stealing other people’s money to pay your debt, is a much better use of your time and will lead to better results for your future. 

Dace Potas is an Opinion fellow for USA TODAY. A graduate from DePaul University with a degree in political science, he's also president of  the Lone Conservative , the largest conservative student-run publication in the country .

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Guest Essay

Elite College Admissions Have Turned Students Into Brands

By Sarah Bernstein

Ms. Bernstein is a playwright, a writing coach and an essayist in Brooklyn.

“I just can’t think of anything,” my student said.

After 10 years of teaching college essay writing, I was familiar with this reply. For some reason, when you’re asked to recount an important experience from your life, it is common to forget everything that has ever happened to you. It’s a long-form version of the anxiety that takes hold at a corporate retreat when you’re invited to say “one interesting thing about yourself,” and you suddenly believe that you are the most boring person in the entire world. Once during a version of this icebreaker, a man volunteered that he had only one kidney, and I remember feeling incredibly jealous of him.

I tried to jog this student’s memory. What about his love of music? Or his experience learning English? Or that time on a summer camping trip when he and his friends had nearly drowned? “I don’t know,” he said with a sigh. “That all seems kind of cliché.”

Applying to college has always been about standing out. When I teach college essay workshops and coach applicants one on one, I see my role as helping students to capture their voice and their way of processing the world, things that are, by definition, unique to each individual. Still, many of my students (and their parents) worry that as getting into college becomes increasingly competitive, this won’t be enough to set them apart.

Their anxiety is understandable. On Thursday, in a tradition known as “Ivy Day,” all eight Ivy League schools released their regular admission decisions. Top colleges often issue statements about how impressive (and competitive) their applicant pools were this cycle. The intention is to flatter accepted students and assuage rejected ones, but for those who have not yet applied to college, these statements reinforce the fear that there is an ever-expanding cohort of applicants with straight A’s and perfect SATs and harrowing camping trip stories all competing with one another for a vanishingly small number of spots.

This scarcity has led to a boom in the college consulting industry, now estimated to be a $2.9 billion business. In recent years, many of these advisers and companies have begun to promote the idea of personal branding — a way for teenagers to distinguish themselves by becoming as clear and memorable as a good tagline.

While this approach often leads to a strong application, students who brand themselves too early or too definitively risk missing out on the kind of exploration that will prepare them for adult life.

Like a corporate brand, the personal brand is meant to distill everything you stand for (honesty, integrity, high quality, low prices) into a cohesive identity that can be grasped at a glance. On its website, a college prep and advising company called Dallas Admissions explains the benefits of branding this way: “Each person is complex, yet admissions officers only have a small amount of time to spend learning about each prospective student. The smart student boils down key aspects of himself or herself into their personal ‘brand’ and sells that to the college admissions officer.”

Identifying the key aspects of yourself may seem like a lifelong project, but unfortunately, college applicants don’t have that kind of time. Online, there are dozens of lesson plans and seminars promising to walk students through the process of branding themselves in five to 10 easy steps. The majority begin with questions I would have found panic-inducing as a teenager, such as, “What is the story you want people to tell about you when you’re not in the room?”

Where I hoped others would describe me as “normal” or, in my wildest dreams, “cool,” today’s teenagers are expected to leave this exercise with labels like, Committed Athlete and Compassionate Leader or Environmentally Conscious Musician. Once students have a draft of their ideal self, they’re offered instructions for manifesting it (or at least, the appearance of it) in person and online. These range from common-sense tips (not posting illegal activity on social media) to more drastic recommendations (getting different friends).

It’s not just that these courses cut corners on self-discovery; it’s that they get the process backward. A personal brand is effective only if you can support it with action, so instead of finding their passion and values through experience, students are encouraged to select a passion as early as possible and then rack up the experience to substantiate it. Many college consultants suggest beginning to align your activities with your college ambitions by ninth grade, while the National Institute of Certified College Planners recommends students “talk with parents, guardians, and/or an academic adviser to create a clear plan for your education and career-related goals” in junior high.

The idea of a group of middle schoolers soberly mapping out their careers is both comical and depressing, but when I read student essays today, I can see that this advice is getting through. Over the past few years, I have been struck by how many high school seniors already have defined career goals as well as a C.V. of relevant extracurriculars to go with them. This widens the gap between wealthy students and those who lack the resources to secure a fancy research gig or start their own small business. (A shocking number of college applicants claim to have started a small business.) It also puts pressure on all students to define themselves at a moment when they are anxious to fit in and yet changing all the time.

In the world of branding, a word that appears again and again is “consistency.” If you are Charmin, that makes sense. People opening a roll of toilet paper do not want to be surprised. If you are a teenage human being, however, that is an unreasonable expectation. Changing one’s interests, opinions and presentation is a natural part of adolescence and an instructive one. I find that my students with scattershot résumés are often the most confident. They’re not afraid to push back against suggestions that ring false and will insist on revising their essay until it actually “feels like me.” On the other hand, many of my most accomplished students are so quick to accept feedback that I am wary of offering it, lest I become one more adult trying to shape them into an admission-worthy ideal.

I understand that for parents, prioritizing exploration can feel like a risky bet. Self-insight is hard to quantify and to communicate in a college application. When it comes to building a life, however, this kind of knowledge has more value than any accolade, and it cannot be generated through a brainstorming exercise in a six-step personal branding course online. To equip kids for the world, we need to provide them not just with opportunities for achievement, but with opportunities to fail, to learn, to wander and to change their minds.

In some ways, the college essay is a microcosm of modern adolescence. Depending on how you look at it, it’s either a forum for self-discovery or a high-stakes test you need to ace. I try to assure my students that it is the former. I tell them that it’s a chance to take stock of everything you’ve experienced and learned over the past 18 years and everything you have to offer as a result.

That can be a profound process. But to embark on it, students have to believe that colleges really want to see the person behind the brand. And they have to have the chance to know who that person is.

Sarah Bernstein is a playwright, a writing coach and an essayist.

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips . And here’s our email: [email protected] .

Follow the New York Times Opinion section on Facebook , Instagram , TikTok , WhatsApp , X and Threads .

The MOBIUS online library catalog will temporarily suspend services MOBIUS borrowing and lending services starting on April 18 as it migrates to a new operating and software system. For material requests, please use interlibrary loans via ILLiad . For further details, see the Temporary Disruption to MOBIUS Service article .

• Awards and Adventures
• Books and Authors

Winners of the 2024 Neureuther Essay Contest

The Washington University Libraries are pleased to announce the winners of the 37th annual  Neureuther Student Book Collection Essay Competition . Named for Carl Neureuther, a 1940 graduate of the Washington University School of Business who set up an endowed book fund for the University Libraries, the contest was designed to inspire reading for pleasure among students and to encourage the development of personal book collections.

The competition is open to all full-time Washington University students, and awardees win four cash prizes of $1000 and $500 at the undergraduate and graduate levels. Participants submit brief essays about the books in their collections. Washington University faculty read the essays to select the award-winning entries.

undergraduate student winners

In the undergraduate category, Brooke Sanchez , a first-year student majoring in political science, was awarded the first prize for her essay, “ Unveiling the Comfort of Female Narratives: Tragedy, Identity, and Embodied Power .” Eliana Jenkins , a senior majoring in global studies and writing, won the second prize for her essay, “ A Lust Letter to Print: Understanding Human Carnality Through the Zines of the World .”

graduate student winners

Perry Parsons , an MA student in theatre and performance studies, won the first prize in the graduate category for the essay, “ My Culture of One; Eight Relational Dances With My Books .” Nicholas Dolan , a PhD student in English and American literature, won the second prize for his essay, “ My Mother’s Planned Parenthood: A Book Sale Elegy .”

The organizing committee thanks all the students who participated in this year’s contest. Neureuther competition’s award-winning essays, from 2003 to the present, can be accessed on  Open Scholarship .