Student Paper
Sis. Bouche
English 314
27 March 2012
Dystopian Reality
A particularly controversial genre of literature, called “dystopia” or “anti-utopia”, questions the direction societies begin to take. While literature describing utopias focuses on the positive advances in society and create the image of a paradise, authors exploring dystopias highlight the negative aspects of society, envisioning a world of oppression and despair. George Orwell’s 1984, perhaps the most famous work of dystopian literature, creates such a dystopian world based on Orwell’s observations of society in his own life, particularly during World War II and the years immediately after. Its publication in 1949 brought about much discussion and criticism; people did not agree that such a world would be possible. However, several of Orwell’s so-called “predictions” have manifested in recent and current society:
David A. Goodman, director of the Newport Neuroscience Center in Culver City, California, has found no less than 137 predictions of technological and social change in Orwell’s book, from urban police patrol helicopters and helicopter gunships to electronic surveillance and the idea of the leader as an invention of the media. Of these forecasts, over 100 had already been realized by the mid-1970s (Frodsham 142).
New advances in technology and social psychology paint an image of a future not too far from the image that Orwell presented. Social medias and world-wide connection through the internet and other devices have proven to be detrimental to society. Freedom of speech clashes with the ease of censorship. Propaganda both in and out of times of war demonstrate the power one leader or group can have over a society. Even such seemingly harmless devices as advertisements and commercials produce an astounding effect on the public. Religion also plays a large role in influencing the mindset of the public. Rules and commandments, concepts of obedience, and promises of redemption and eternal reward easily sway a group to the will of a leader. At the same time, fear of punishment or exile accomplishes the same task. These aspects of society line up with the society of 1984 in a way that should not be ignored. A dystopian society such as the one Orwell suggested in his novel must be considered a very possible outcome to the path taken by current society.
One major factor leading to the creation of the dystopian genre was and is the steady advance of technology. The introduction of the internet, personal computers, and cellular phones has led to a massive surge in the number of people with access to great amounts of technology. Such devices have connected the world, allowing messages and information to be sent anywhere on earth in a matter of seconds. Society has entered into an age of technology; individuals can manage nearly everything online, from bank accounts to shopping to education. While new technology has certainly proven useful, it also presents a frightening possibility beyond the predictions of Orwell: “Orwell’s vision of the future would have been even grimmer had he been aware of the development of the computer, silicon chip technology, mind-altering drugs, and modern weaponry” (Frodsham 142). Any information uploaded to the internet has the potential to be viewed by anyone. Many companies and identity thieves gain access to this information and use it against the owner’s will: “Spammers and virus-writers can set up false profiles and trawl through Social Networking Sites (including Blogs) gathering information about job titles, phone numbers, e-mail addresses, etc.” (van Zyl 913-14). Various technologies allow for video communication, which can be used in a variety of negative ways. Orwell described a device called a “telescreen” that constantly surveyed individuals in their houses: Any sound that Winston made, above the level of a very low whisper, would be picked up by it, moreover, so long as he remained within the field of vision which the metal plaque commanded, he could be seen as well as heard” (2). Such surveillance has been used in real life, such as in the case of the college student who used his computer camera to spy on his roommate. His invasion of personal space caused his roommate to commit suicide (Rosenthal). Governments have potential access to surveillance methods of the kind that Orwell wrote about. If the government can monitor the daily lives of its citizens, it would be capable to closely controlling the actions, words, and even thoughts of society. Orwell’s depiction of a totalitarian society seems more and more likely with the advancement of technology. Not only do governments have access to monitor and control such technologies, they also have the ability to censor and even block internet access. Countries such as China and North Korea have placed heavy censorships on internet usage, even going to far as to monitor topics discussed on social sites. In addition to providing opportunity for government interference, advances in technology serve as a danger to society because of the immense distraction they cause. Car related accidents, often resulting in death, occur more often with the introduction of cellular phones. While the introduction of computer technology into business has increased production, it also poses the problem of reducing production “because employees may spend too much time networking and posting entries on blogs and wikis. There is also a risk that employees will utilise it for more social purposes and not on work related postings” (van Zyl 914). These distractions are not only bad for productivity; they have proven detrimental to personal health. A study conducted by the HomeNet Group indicated that individuals who spend excessive amounts of time on computers or laptops “reported keeping up with fewer friends, spending less time talking with their families, experiencing more daily life stressors, and feeling more lonely and depressed (Mayo 21). HomeNet also points out that “the evolution of the Internet and the domestication process is just starting,” alluding to the further advancement—and further negative impact—of technologies such as the internet (Mayo 22). The more time individuals spend using technology, the more power governments and other groups have in using technology to influence the public.
The government of 1984, called the Party, exhibits complete control of the public. Propaganda serves as the primary way they accomplish such a level of control. The Party exhibits a unique level of propaganda: they constantly change written history to match their current ideals and actions. Winston Smith, the story’s protagonist, works for a branch of the government called the “Ministry of Truth” or “Minitrue” (Orwell 2). His job in the records department involves rewriting news articles “which for one reason or another it was thought necessary to alter, or, as the official phrase had it, to rectify” to fit current policies. For example, if an official made a prediction regarding the war and something else happened, the record of the speech would be altered to indicate the official actually predicted what happened. Michael Clune explains: “The prohibition against looking at the surface of the world constitutes another resource by which the Party prepares an intense and never-fading perceptual shock for its citizens” (36). Citizens are not allowed to analyze events for themselves; they are immediately and constantly fed information that has been analyzed for them. They rely on the government for all of their information because “the regime cultivates a background of expectations that are continually and dramatically frustrated. Nothing tastes, looks, or feels like it is supposed to” (Clune 35). Such propaganda exists in actual society to a lesser extent; tabloids, television and radio stations, and internet sites hold the freedom to offer any information they want, regardless of its accuracy. However, images are used more often as propaganda. Perhaps the most obvious example of propaganda in the novel is the creation of the leader of the government, known as Big Brother. Big Brother exists in the form of a face on a poster, above the caption “BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU” (Orwell 1). His image stares down at the citizens from every surface, constantly reminding them of his watchful eye. Such uses of image propaganda appear frequently in current society. Political cartoons slander opposition, depicting the other side in grotesque and exaggerated ways. Political campaigns accomplish the same task. Advertisements and commercials present products in ideal and perfect situations in order to sway an individual to purchase them. The public is bombarded with propaganda through advertisement on a daily basis; such propaganda appears on billboards, in movie theaters and stores, on internet websites, and even on public transportation. In history, propaganda has been used to promote racism and war. The most infamous use of propaganda in history, and a heavy influence on Orwell as he wrote 1984, was the use of imagery, newspaper articles, and speeches used to turn the German people—specifically the Nazi party led by Adolf Hitler—against the Jewish population. Depictions of Jewish men with abnormally large noses, falsified publications of “scientific research” proving the Jews are inferior, and the promotion of the idea that the Aryan race is superior successfully influenced a large group of people to commit horrible acts towards several minority groups: Jews, gypsies, homosexuals, and the mentally retarded. Such atrocities occurred because, according to Joseph Adelson, “to lie, to be lied to, to accept being lied to, or to rationalize and defend lying for the sake of a better world—all of that, taken to its extreme, will produce a sick and divided soul,” allowing individuals to separate themselves from their actions in the name of obedience (59). Propaganda convinces individuals of a reality that is not always correct and that always places one side or another in a more positive light. Michael P. Zuckert states that “reality is altogether, or for all practical purposes, in the mind” (93). Using this logic, it is easy to see how propaganda can be used to sway large groups; it alters the way individuals see reality. The Party in 1984 uses propaganda to sway the masses in a dramatic way; their negative depiction of a man who rebelled against the government evoke a frenzied rage by merely showing the public an image of his face during sessions called the “Two Minutes Hate”: “the sight or even the thought of Goldstein produced fear and anger automatically…In its second minute the Hate rose to a frenzy. People were leaping up and down in their places and shouting at the tops of their voices in an effort to drown the maddening bleating voice that came from the screen” (Orwell 7). Through propaganda, the Party exerts total control over the public, drawing on the ease of swaying a group.
Dystopian societies and totalitarian governments do not simply happen. If such a thing were to occur suddenly, there would be protest and rebellion. It must happen slowly, encouraged by “a group of people bound together by a common purpose” (Frodsham 148). One method used by the Party to maintain their control is the removal of personal identity in favor of group identity. This is accomplished in several ways: the encouragement to refer to the group instead of individuals (“you were supposed to call everyone ‘comrade’”), uniforms (“blue overalls”), group brainwashing (Two Minutes Hate), etc. (Orwell 11, 1). Philip G. Zimbardo, professor of psychology at Stanford University, stated, “We all have the capacity for evil and good waiting for the right or wrong situation to bring it out.” He explained that simply changing something about the social situation can bring out the best or worst of humanity. People naturally want to conform to societal norms and the behaviors they observe in others. If the government controls the social environment, as it does in 1984, it becomes easy to control the behavior and beliefs of the public by giving them an acceptable behavior or belief to conform to. Individuals who view themselves as part of a group are more likely to comply with the rules and regulations involved in that group. In addition, individuals are scientifically proven to be more likely to perform acts that they would not perform under normal circumstances when they are following orders. Famous psychologist Stanley Milgram conducted a controversial experiment in which paid subjects were asked to play the role of “teacher”. Their instructions were to assist a random “student” (played by a trained actor) in memory exercises. Each time the “student” answered a question incorrectly, the “teacher” was instructed to give the “student” a shock, increasing the intensity of the shock with each incorrect response until the shocks were fatal in strength. Regardless of the fact that the “student” protested and exclaimed in pain, none of the subjects ceased the experiment until after a point where the shocks became dangerous, and several of the subjects continued to administer shocks until the final, lethal shock (Encina). This demonstrates that individuals who are following instructions are likely to perform acts that are not socially acceptable. Members of the Nazi party likely worked under this principle; obedience allows individuals to separate their actions from their morals and beliefs. Group identity also provides opportunity for another psychological trait: the bystander influence (Levine 785). This concept states that when more people are present, individuals are less likely to provide assistance. Such an idea explains the lack of action from neutral groups in terrible events: the German population during the Holocaust, bystanders and witnesses during crimes who do not contact the police or offer assistance until after the crime has been committed, etc. The bystander influence would account for the totalitarian government in 1984, as each citizen assumed someone else would do something. These aspects combine in Orwell’s novel to create a dystopian society. Alex Zwerdling pointed out that “Orwell was trying to convey the atmosphere of a society in which mass psychology, the systematic study and manipulation of crowd response, has become a major force in public life” (70). These social aspects, both in the novel and in reality, pose a large threat to society as it currently stands.
Religions and cults stand as some of the most influential group settings in society. Organizations such as these provide several benefits for humanity. They allow individuals to gather and socialize, creating a group identity. Social networking in these groups provides the means for communication and the accomplishment of larger tasks. Religions and cults also set out a set of rules and guidelines for groups to follow, showing them a “right” way to live. People often live better and healthier lives because of their religious system. However, these traits allow for the possibility of great evils in society. Individuals who pervert these rules and guidelines and gain leadership have the potential to lead groups of people to unacceptable actions. The influence of evil leadership has shown itself in multiple religion and cult events. An extreme example of religion gone wrong occurred in the 1970s in a place termed Jonestown. A “charismatic” leader of a cult called People’s Temple led over 900 followers to a remote location in Guyana to live a life of “racial harmony” and “social justice” (“Jonestown”). They lived in such a utopia for a while, but due to mental illness, paranoia, and other factors, Jones decided the time had come for him and his followers to leave this doomed world. They committed mass suicide and murder on November 18, 1978 (“Jonestown”). Around 900 people, including hundreds of children, died because one leader ordered it. In situations like this, whether they are as dramatic or not, groups of followers experience two separate loyalties. The first is towards the leader: “The attachment to the leader is partly expressed in an intense identification with him or her, an identification that becomes internalized so that a group member unconsciously comes to replace or modify his or her operative ideals to accord with that of the leader” (Ulman 644). An individual will begin to believe what the leader tells him and will adjust his personal ideals accordingly. In 1984 this is demonstrated by the apathetic and accepting manner in which the general population accept the ever-changing ideals of the government: “one of those completely unquestioning, devoted drudges on whom, more even than on the Thought Police, the stability of the Party depended” (Orwell 12). Leaders need followers to accomplish anything; this group identity allows a leader to sway the opinion of the individuals and therefore the group. The second loyalty found in religious and cult groups is loyalty to each other. Individuals who feel part of a group feel responsible to and for their fellow group members and the group in general (Ulman 645). This concept explains the mass suicide in the Jonestown incident as individuals felt a loyalty to one another to uphold the cult ideals. It also explains the unity felt by the characters in Orwell’s novel, a unity that ties them to each other and to the Party. The government is able to gain this level of support and unity through the removal of traditional religion in favor of worship of Big Brother and the Party. Stephen Spender explains that “the tragedy of Orwell’s world is that man—Big Brother—turns himself into God, but there is no God” (44). The Party takes control, regarding religion as unnecessary, which, according to David Lowenthal, it is: “Biblical religion, therefore, cannot be regarded as the opiate of the people, who without it are already custom-bound” (169). Lowenthal describes the real benefit of religion—a system of rules and guidelines—and explains that the people in Orwell’s world exist within such a system without traditional religion. However, resisting religion has its drawbacks:
Man rebels against the restrictions of God and nature and thereby renders the Earthly Paradise possible. But in so doing he creates individuals far more power-hungry than before…For the sake of power-ultimately for their own immortal self-preservation-they proceed to distort and destroy human nature itself, so that the original revolt for human freedom and brotherhood terminates in unparalleled oppression. The dream of an Earthly Paradise results in an Earthly Hell (Lowenthal 165).
Man is power-hungry, but a god is not. Replacing an unseen power for a man-made power opens the doors to power struggles, repression, and misery. Stephen S. Colvin lists two important requirements that must be met if religion is to be abolished. The first is “if intelligence were perfect and knowledge absolute” (86). Religion serves to explain the unexplainable. Without it, mankind would be left in a world with no understandable meaning. However, if science could explain every phenomenon, religion would become unnecessary. The Party attempts to accomplish this by controlling the concept of truth. The Ministry of Truth exists solely to alter history to fit the “truth” of the present day political ideals and provide “every conceivable kind of information” (Orwell 24). However, their strict control of information—more specifically, their constant introduction of false information—is noticed by a few members of society. Winston works in the Ministry of Truth and comments on the inconsistency: “It was merely the substitution of one piece of nonsense for another” (23). The second requirement is that life has to be “satisfactory” (Colvin 87). However, individuals cannot truly escape suffering. Religion is needed to provide a sense of purpose to life. The world Orwell depicts is bland and dull. Individuals cannot find happiness in a society that dictates every belief scientifically. By replacing God with Big Brother, the Party has not only succeeded in controlling the public, but also instilling society with dissatisfaction. The lack of religion in 1984 demonstrates the tragedy found in a world without purpose.
Orwell’s novel depicts a dreary future. His use of psychological ideas such as group identity gives his words a startling realism. Images of propaganda, technological advances, and radical groups strike a chord in modern society as it tends towards behaviors described by 1984. Technology, while beneficial, reveals several grim possibilities, such as brainwashing and apathy. Propaganda influences day to day life, pressuring individuals to buy products and services, support causes, and feel a sense of duty. Group tendencies mentioned in the novel—such as mass obedience, blindly following a leader, conformity, etc.—manifest themselves in frighteningly similar ways in present day society. Harmful religions and cults, as well as radical groups against religions, flourish in society, particularly in free societies. This could lead to more and more instances like the Jonestown case. As depressing as his fictional world is, Orwell’s predictions have and continue to come true. His warnings must not be taken lightly; if they are, his greatest fears for humanity could become a reality.
Works Cited
Adelson, Joseph. “Self and Memory.” Print. Bloom’s Guides: George Orwell’s 1984. By
Harold Bloom. Philadelphia: Chelsea House, 2004. 56-61.
Clune, Michael. “Orwell and the Obvious.” Representations. 107.1 (2009): 30-55. JSTOR. Web. 19 Mar. 2012.
Colvin, Stephen S. “The Psychological Necessity of Religion.” The American Journal of
Psychology. 13.1 (1902): 80-87. Print.
Encina, Gregorio Billikopf. “Milgram’s Experiment on Obedience to Authority.” College of Natural Resources. UC Berkley, 15 Nov. 2004. 24 Mar. 2012. Web.
Frodsham, John David. “The New Barbarians: Totalitarianism, Terror and the Left Intelligentsia in Orwell’s 1984.” World Affairs. 147.3 (1984): 139-60. JSTOR. 17 Mar. 2012. Web.
“Jonestown Survivors Recall Fateful Day.” CNN.com. Cable News Network, 18 Nov. 2003.
24 Mar. 2012. Web.
Levine, Mark, Clare Cassidy, Ines Jentzsch. “The Implicit Identity Effect: Identity Primes, Group
Size, and Helping.” British Journal of Social Psychology. 49.4 (2010): 785-802. Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection. 10 Mar. 2012. Web.
Lowenthal, David. “Orwell’s Political Pessimism in ‘1984’.” Polity. 2.2 (1969): 160-75. JSTOR.
17 Mar. 2012. Web.
Mayo, Martin. “Social Impact of the Internet: What Does It Mean?.” Communications of the
ACM. 41.12 (1998): 21-22. JSTOR. 19 Mar. 2012. Web.
The Power of the Situation. Perf. Philip Zimbardo. Discovering Psychology. Annenberg Learner,
- 9 Mar. 2012. Web.
Spender, Stephen. “Morality in the Novel.” Print. Bloom’s Guides: George Orwell’s 1984. By
Harold Bloom. Philadelphia: Chelsea House, 2004. 43-44.
Ulman, Richard Barrett, and D. Wilfred Abse. “The Group Psychology of Mass Madness:
Jonestown.” Political Psychology. 4.4 (1983): 637-61. JSTOR. 24 Mar. 2012. Web.
Van Zyl, Anria Sophia. “The Impact of Social Networking 2.0 on Organisations.” The Electronic
Library. 27.6 (2009): 906-18. JSTOR. 19 Mar. 2012. Web.
Zuckert, Michael P. “Winston’s Defeat.” Print. Bloom’s Guides: George Orwell’s 1984. By
Harold Bloom. Philadelphia: Chelsea House, 2004. 91-94.
Zwerdling, Alex. “The Isolation of the Individual.” Print. Bloom’s Guides: George Orwell’s
- 1984. By Harold Bloom. Philadelphia: Chelsea House, 2004. 67-75.Click here to have a similar paper done for you by one of our writers within the set deadline at a discounted…
