1984 Post #2

Welcome to my second blog post for 1984! I have recently read from page 201 to 326. Since I have now finished 1984, I would like to comment on the overall theme of the novel. But first of all, it is important to note that there is no novel in the world that has only one, absolute theme, and I think that this book is no exception. Just because my idea of the theme is different from your idea does not mean that you are necessarily incorrect. With that said, I hope you enjoy reading this post.

If someone asked me to come up with a theme statement for the novel 1984, I would most definitely say that the theme statement is: "Power in the wrong hands can be devastating." This is the major theme of the novel because the Party (the group that controls Oceania), especially the Inner Party, has an enormous amount of power, but it uses that power for its own means. Because this is happening, the entire society of Oceania (one of the three superpowers that exists in the novel) is more or less corrupt. Now, by "corrupt," I don't mean that society isn't allowed to read books (Fahrenheit 451) or that society is full of people that are called by numbers instead of names (We). By "corrupt," I mean that society has lost virtually all of its freedom. I will elaborate a bit further in order to give you a better picture of the situation.

Imagine a world where you are constantly being watched. When you wake up, you must exercise, or you'll be punished. You have to go to work every day at the same exact time. You cannot say anything negative about the Party, or you will definitely be "re-educated." You cannot marry anybody without the Party's permission, and even then, you cannot marry for love. Everything you say or do is noticed by the government through special "telescreens," which are devices that both receive and give information, enabling the government to feed you propaganda while keeping an eye on you at the same time.

Not only this, but you are also constantly being fed lies every single day. The government tells you that your nation has been at war with Eurasia since the very beginning, even though you've been told just the day before that your nation has been at war with Eastasia. The government tells you that the chocolate ration has increased by ten grams, even though you know for a fact that it actually decreased. The government tells you that two and two make five, and even though you know that this is not the case, you are expected to believe it or suffer the consequences.

This is the dystopia of 1984. After reading up to this point, I am sure you'll agree with me that the dystopia featured in the novel is very much corrupt. The reason for this is because of "power (being) in the wrong hands." In 1984, there are three groups of people: the Inner Party members, the Outer Party members, and the proletarians, otherwise known as the proles. Most of the power belongs to the Inner Party, which is a small group of elites who make up only two percent of the population. Even though the Inner Party has so much power that could be used to increase the quality of life of Oceania's citizens, it instead uses this power to make sure that the Inner Party keeps that power forever, through the construction of devices such as telescreens, in order to make sure that there is no rebellion. This immoral application of power resulted in the entire dystopia of 1984, which is why I believe that the theme statement of 1984 is: "Power in the wrong hands can be devastating."

Thank you for reading my second post for 1984.

1984 Post #1

Welcome to the first blog post of my second novel, 1984, a dystopian classic by George Orwell! I have recently read from page 1 to 200. Today, I just want to share a passage that was extremely significant to me. After I share the passage, I'll take some time to explain why it was meaningful. The passage is from page 195, which is when Winston Smith observes a man who is about to enter the dreaded Room 101. Here's the passage:

The door opened. With a small gesture the officer indicated the skull-faced man.
"Room 101," he said.
There was a gasp and a flurry at Winston's side. The man had actually flung himself on his knees on the floor, with his hands clasped together.
"Comrade! Officer!" he cried. "You don't have to take me to that place! Haven't I told you everything already? What else is it you want to know? There's nothing I wouldn't confess, nothing! Just tell me what it is and I'll confess it straight off. Write it down and I'll sign it - anything! Not room 101!"
"Room 101," said the officer.
The man's face, already very pale, turned a color Winston would not have believed possible. It was definitely, unmistakably, a shade of green.
"Do anything to me!" he yelled. "You've been starving me for weeks. Finish it off and let me die. Shoot me. Hang me. Sentence me to twenty-five years. Is there somebody else you want me to give away? Just say who it is and I'll tell you anything you want. I don't care who it is or what you do to them. I've got a wife and three children. The biggest of them isn't six years old. You can take the whole lot of them and cut their throats in front of my eyes, and I'll stand by and watch it. But not room 101!"
"Room 101," said the officer.

This passage is significant because of two main reasons. First, it accurately portrays just how much humans hate pain. Second, it demonstrates just how far humans will go to get away from pain. After reading this passage, I was shocked and surprised at the same time. How could the skull-faced man do something like this? Though I was shocked, I was pleasantly surprised to see that George Orwell knew just the right way to show the reader exactly what we'll do to escape pain.

The passage accurately portrays how much humans hate pain. The skull-faced man actually flung himself on his knees and begged for mercy. He didn't just ask the guard whether he could stay in his cell and not go to Room 101. The man didn't just frown and say, "That's a bummer." No, the man threw himself down, put his knees on the floor, and cried out for mercy. Even now, I can imagine a skeleton flying towards the ground and weeping for grace. This shows how much humans can't stand to be in pain, so this passage was meaningful to me.

Orwell didn't only demonstrate how much we hate pain. He also effectively showed us how far we'll go to get away from it. In the passage, the man sobbed and pleaded in a variety of different ways to get away from pain. At first, he cried out and promised that he would confess to anything as long as he didn't get to go to Room 101. The guard could have made the skull-faced man confess to the murder of 300,000 people, and even though he (the man) knew that was false, he wouldn't have cared because he wouldn't have to go through pain. The man then asked the guard to kill him because death would at least be painless (because the man would either be hanged or shot). However, this is nothing compared to what finally happened.

The skull-faced man told the guard that he would allow him to take his wife and children and cut their throats in front of his (the man's) eyes! Now, this shows just how low humans will go to escape pain. The man said that he would sacrifice his family members! This despicable act of selfishness accurately portrays the lengths we'll go to.

Because of these two reasons, this passage from 1984 is meaningful to me. Thank you for reading my first post for 1984.

Nightmares & Dreamscapes Post #3

Welcome to my third blog post! I have recently read from page 476 to 581 of Nightmares & Dreamscapes, a short story collection by Stephen King. In this entry, I want to discuss two short stories that entirely fascinated and intrigued me: "The House on Maple Street" and "The Doctor's Case."

"The House on Maple Street" is a short story about an extraordinary event that occurs on Maple Street, which is located in England. The protagonists are the Bradbury children: Melissa, Brian, Laurie, and Trent. They are living in their house, which is (obviously) located on Maple Street, with their mother and their cruel and vicious stepfather, Lew. The Bradbury children fervently desire to get rid of Lew because of his tyranny, but they are unable to. However, they eventually find out that something is growing in the basement of the house. The children later discover an electronic timer that appeared out of nowhere and realize that the house will probably blast off into space once the timer counts down to zero. The children formulate a plan which involves tricking their stepfather into entering the house and then locking him in his study. At the end of the story, the house does indeed lift off into outer space, with a confused and frightened Lew trapped helplessly inside.

I found this short story to be particularly intriguing because of how it evoked several emotions. First, it evoked great wrath and anger. I was outraged to read that when Lew's wife (the children's mother) fainted during a party, Lew didn't bother to check on his wife even once during the entire party. How could a husband do that to his wife? Lew didn't care about his wife one bit and treated her as though she was just an object, instead of treating her as a human being. Husbands, as men, are supposed to care for their wives. I remember thinking, "God would certainly not be pleased with Lew."

The story also evoked much joy and happiness. At the end of the story, when the house blasted off, I was relieved and jubilant because the children were finally free from their cruel and inhumane stepfather. I felt happy for the children because they could now live their remaining lives in peace. However, I also felt sad and worried for the children because they were technically "homeless." After all, their house and all of their possessions (including money) blasted off to space, so it would be extremely difficult for one mother to make enough money to take care of her four children as well as herself. Even though I knew that this was only a story, it felt so realistic that I couldn't help but feel pity.

As you can see, this short story was intriguing to me because it evoked various emotions. Another intriguing short story that I read was "The Doctor's Case."

"The Doctor's Case" is unique in that it is a pastiche, which is a work by one author that imitates the work of another. Basically, "The Doctor's Case" is Stephen King's version of a Sherlock Holmes short mystery story. Dr. Watson narrates the tale and talks about how he, and not Holmes, solved a murder mystery in the past. In the story, a British man named Lord Hull was recently murdered inside of his room, even though all of the doors and windows were locked. His one wife and three sons each have a reason to detest and kill the man; Hull frequently abused his wife, ignored his eldest son, taunted and belittled his deformed middle son, and refused to allow his youngest, most intellectual son to take control of Lord Hull's business affairs.

Unfortunately for Sherlock Holmes, who has a severe allergy to cats, Lord Hull was a cat enthusiast and owned many cats in his home, which prevents Holmes from thinking clearly. Watson quickly discovers that someone from Hull's family killed Hull because he (Lord Hull) was going to change his will and not leave any money for the rest of the Hull family. Watson then finds out that the middle son, Jory, drew a realistic painting of the bottom of a table, put it under Lord Hull's table, and hid under the table to check whether Hull was actually going to change his will or not. When Jory saw that Hull was indeed going to change the will and burn the old one, Jory stabbed Hull, who uttered a final cry, leaving Jory no time to pick up his painting. Holmes and Watson eventually decide not to report Jory to the police, as they believe that Lord Hull somewhat deserved his death.

This short story was interesting because I could see connections to the world. For instance, every person on Earth has suffered or suffers from some kind of injustice. Some people cope with their injustices through endurance. That is, some people just try to endure the injustice and hope that the situation becomes better later on. An excellent example of a person demonstrating this concept would be my friend, Muhammad. During the time of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, many of my classmates lashed out against Muhammad as though he was responsible for the terrorist attacks, solely because of the fact that he was a Muslim. However, Muhammad didn't really try to defend himself. Instead, he just ignored the claims and hoped that people would stop harassing him. After several months, they did stop, which shows that Muhammad's endurance paid off in the end. After I read this short story, I couldn't help but think of my friend Muhammad, who endured his injustice. I thought it was amazing how Stephen King could write his short story in such a universally appealing way as to make readers truly "connect" with his story, as I did.

These two short stories, "The House on Maple Street" and "The Doctor's Case," were intriguing to me because the first story evoked several different emotions, while the second prompted me to think of connections to the world and other people. Thanks for reading this blog post!