Contradictions

At the beginning of George Orwell’s novel 1984, these words are presented as the official motto of the nation of Oceania:

War is Peace
Freedom is Slavery 
Ignorance is Strength 
Though to us these statements are obvious contradictions, The Party in 1984 is devoted to establishing them as ultimate truths. Shortly into the novel we can infer that Orwell opened the book with this for a reason: to introduce the reader to the concept of Doublethink, which can be understood as the ability to accept two opposing ideas in one’s mind simultaneously. 

I'll briefly pause here to appreciate how this philosophy is impressively puzzling. As in 1984, today Doublethink can be considered a coping mechanism to rationalize one's internal conflicts. Consider how people often live with multiple belief systems which may easily contradict. A scientist and a committed Christian likely manages their beliefs by compartmentalizing - thinking in several sets of fundamentally contradicting beliefts, yet somehow having an absolutist wall in that mind that holds the two apart or acts as a grey space to be untouched. Without getting too personal, I, for example, happen to fall into a spectrum of the latter's example of thinking. Often times we can feel caught in cognitive dissonance that we come to accept through fallacies we argue to ourselves. We can thank Orwell for putting a name to this phenomenon. 

Back to my point:
By manufacturing an environment built upon fear, propaganda, and contradictions, The Party is able to destroy its citizen’s individuality, independence, and autonomy. 
More and more we see similar contradictions appear as they are birthed from the very top of the power hierarchy and evolve to reach everyday citizens; consider the following:
-      The Ministry of Peace oversees war 
-      The Ministry of Love carries out the torture of pollical prisoners & acts as Oceania’s police. 
-      The Ministry of Truth is responsible for manipulating the content in the news and in books  
  to agree with The Party’s beliefs. 
I’d argue that more than anything, it is these fundamental contradictions that keep Oceania’s citizens in a constant imbalance. Since we see these people never being sure of themselves or of each other for that matter, they are forced to rely on The Party for guidance as to how to function and live their lives. Thus, The Party has people trapped in a constant psychological bind that has become their darkest reality. 
In one way or another, manipulation to gain control seems to play an essential role in each of the dysopian novels we have read thus far. 
The question now is how it will play out in 1984. 
Thoughts?

Comments

  1. Irina April 7, 2019 at 7:56 PM

    Wow...I was totally unaware of the complexity of doublethink. Thank you for clarifying! It is true that manipulation plays a crucial role in all the dystopias we've read so far, but it has appeared in various forms - soma in BNW, and fear of death(?) in Handmaid's Tale. I wonder if the restriction of langauge thought will be the form of manipulation in 1984.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Ahmad BobatApril 8, 2019 at 4:51 PM

    Interesting. I can see how this can fit into a large scale form of manipulation. For example, after reading this it becomes clear doublethink and newspeak correlate a lot in terms of long term control, beause while newspeak aims to get rid of words, and ultimately ideas, from English all together, doublethink keeps the words too important to trash but attributes new, twisted, definitions to them. I wonder how many other tactics we will see play together in the book all to maintain control over the people of Oceania.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Kevin LiApril 9, 2019 at 11:19 AM

    These contradictions are strange to me, and while I don't think its the most efficient way of controlling people, it is effective. Doublethink is an interesting concept, where you have contradictions to help cope with ideas. I can see how the government would control people with this, you wouldn't be able to think of anything without considering the opposite, and with newspeak being introduced, you would only be able to think in terms of how the government wanted you to. You would not be able to focus on anything properly since you would always be thinking in terms of contradictions. its a way of controlling thoughts.

    ReplyDelete
  4. HadiyahApril 10, 2019 at 7:23 PM

    Manipulation with language is a really interesting way to gain control, much more than soma. It's scary how with doublethink they're able to make people believe they're fine even though they're being oppressed. At first I thought the contradictions were just ironic and by accident like they have a ministry of peace that can't keep peace, but know I see how its manipulation. With doublethink you're taught to believe people are tortured because the government loves you or you may feel enslaved but you're actually free.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Ayah JaberApril 11, 2019 at 3:18 PM

    This post is so interesting, especially after the reading we had today. Its also interesting that we can see real-life example of this type of manipulation during the Vietnam war: https://www.vietnampropaganda.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/UN-translating-war-into-peace.jpg
    Obviously, Orwell had to get the inspiration for these slogans from somewhere, so I would not be surprised if they were used in the propaganda of the first and second World Wars. Nice post!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Sparsh S.April 11, 2019 at 3:59 PM

    The Party also gains control through forcing Newspeak upon its people. The language bases itself upon the principles doublethink by ridding of the many contradictions oldspeak possesses, thereby manipulating everyone to be loyal and trusting of the Party. In turn, this can be used to further dehumanize society as more and more words are redacted from their vocabulary until a pinnacle is reached and they become thoughtless individuals. If the Party lasts long enough to see Newspeak become the dominant language in society, every word basically becomes a directive that is automatically processed and carried out without the need for thought. Society will begin to resemble a typical ant colony: busy forever serving their queen, Big Brother.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Minji ChoiApril 13, 2019 at 8:55 AM

    Great post! I struggled to completely understand the concept of Doublethink while reading the book, however, after reading your example of what this would look like played out in real life, I feel that I have a better understanding of it, and that it is actually closer to reality than it would seem at first glance. I would say most people hold two completely contradicting ideas in their minds, and refuse to admit that one cannot be true if the other is. This is a natural result of being human, as this is how our brains are naturally wired (I learned it in my u of I PSYC class lol), and the fact that the society in 1984 uses it to their advantage is equally scary and genius.

    ReplyDelete
  8. AlbertApril 13, 2019 at 9:55 AM

    I think the contradictions make it so that the policies of Oceania are vague. The motto doesn't really make sense and could potentially be interpreted as many different things. I see this as keeping people under their control by doing whatever Oceania pleases and then justifying it with their motto. Additionally, it serves as good justification for their potetnailly questionable policies and actions. I think it adds a nice dystopian touch to the novel and I appreciated the contradictions in the novel.

    ReplyDelete
  9. GrantMay 13, 2019 at 10:54 AM

    I think is part of the parties larger goal of completely destroying the truth. The citizens live with and accept these contradictions and just have to go of what the party says. The naming conventions serve as this way of broadcasting how the truth is completely obsolete in this society.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Ayat JaberMay 17, 2019 at 3:03 AM

    Interesting post! I think doublethink, especially in 1984, is a concept this takes people in circles and commits them to things in a certain war. War is Peace seems to not make sense at all, yet citizens were raised on this and thus use it as their basis of truth in their minds. And if you think about it more and more, you get sucked into the concept, and it’s hard to just leave it alone. The mind is a very complicated thing.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Particicution in the Real World

Warning: contains upsetting content. Read at your own risk. In The Handmaid's Tale , one of the most disturbing scenes is that of the Particicution, where handmaids are encouraged to tear an accused rapist to death. Such events are reminiscent of lynchings, but with one key difference; as far as I know, lynching were not publicly sanctioned events. And since Margaret Atwood stated that all events that occur in this book are drawn from real world events, I became curious as to whether or not Atwood drew inspiration from other sources. Although I was unable to find examples of state sanctioned events where humans physically tear apart other humans (comment below if you do), I found another form of public execution that is, if not more, disturbing that the Particicution. Stoning is a capital punishment where the criminal is buried up to the chest or neck in the ground and people gather around to throw stones at them until they die. A very slow, painful process. And in the source
Read more

Why did Margaret Atwood write the Handmaid's Tale?

The Handmaid’s Tale has been one of the most emotionally disturbing books I’ve ever read. There are points where I honestly thought the society couldn’t get any worse but then Margaret Atwood drops a new detail into the storyline that brings an even darker side of it to the light. So to cope, I’ve shifted towards trying to understand why she would ever write the Handmaid’s Tale in the first place.  Undoubtedly, the society is a dystopia. However, I feel that Margaret Atwood has been particularly successful in creating a world that most people would never want to live in. With women essentially being slaves who are subjected to some pretty horrifying stuff and the Eyes surveilling every action someone takes, it sounds like a new type of hell.   Yet why bother writing such a book? Isn’t this the type of thing you have nightmares about and is best kept in your own thoughts than written in 311 pages? Evidently, Margaret Atwood had a reason for writing this book. Person
Read more

Humanity

Humanity is powerful. Many would argue that it exists as the most defining characteristic of people. Without it, our ability to love, feel compassion, or experience community would dull our complexes and alter our moral. With that in mind, it’s no wonder that at the core of what makes a society dystopian is its lack of humanity. Whether it is masked by tyranny, discrimination, or anything in between, without humanity, a true utopia is simply unachievable. Thereby, dystopian novels are notorious for having some form of authority seize control by reducing a people’s sense of humanity.        Consider how the World State in Brave New World exists with the sole intention of oppressing natural human emotions and tendencies – a prime context of a dystopian society. Reading Brave New World , I was constantly waiting for the ball to drop: for Helmholtz and John to speak up and spark a much-needed revolution against the World State. This, however, obviously never came into fr
Read more