Spirit Breaker — The Destruction of the Self Within George Orwell’s Dystopian Nightmare

As human civilization and technology grows more advanced, we like to think that we are progressing with it. Often, people will utter the phrase “look how far we’ve come,” as a way to bolster the various achievements that we have accomplished. However, all that glitters is not gold. Whilst it may be true that we as a race have excelled in a multitude of fields such as science, math and art, with this comes at a great cost. In a sense, these advancements have lead to the greatest of our downfalls, which includes the suppression of individuality and in some cases, the relinquishment of our civil liberties. George Orwell’s dystopian novel 1984 provides a warning to the world as to what the future may hold if this is allowed to continue. Published only four years after the end of World War 2, Orwell wrote the novel as a reaction to witnessing the rise of totalitarian governments, specifically the Soviet Union. In the novel, the ruling Inner Party clearly embodies this concept. Orwell’s dramatization of totalitarian ideology represents a warning to society of what may come in the future, if those with unchecked power gain access to our evolving technology. Although the lust for power is inherent within human nature, rational people understand that it must be limited in order to prevent states and ruling elites with absolute power.

Due to the geopolitical landscape of Orwell’s time period, he developed an ever growing fearful awareness of the power of technology, and how it could potentially be used to strip mankind of its humanity. Specifically, he dramatized the Soviet Union ideology lead by the malicious Stalin government. 1984 is a direct allegory to the USSR and what may become of the future. The 20th century totalitarian regimes such as the USSR are only the beginning to what may evolve in the future, as Orwell warns. The technology and ideology of The Party possess allows them to maintain unparalleled authority over the lives of the citizens within Oceania. In a totalitarian state, all possible facets of people’s lives are controlled by the government. There is no sense of freedom or individuality. The government defines how each person lives their life, what they do and what they think using the threat of physical persecution to weed out any opposition. People are typically confined to leading slave-like lives, always forcibly accepting whatever the government tells them to do and work for.

Orwell’s harsh criticisms of totalitarian governments and the Soviet Union in particular can be found throughout his body of work. The violent means of political persecution under Joseph Stalin during the period of time known as the Great Purge (1936–1938) is mirrored by the use of force exercised by The Party in Oceania. Ironically, however, the primary targets of these executions were not simply high profile revolutionaries, but the general populus. As Hiroaki Kuromiya writes “In numerical terms, the Terror struck ‘ordinary people’ more than the elite. These ‘ordinary people’ were the bulk of the victims, although the elite was almost certainly disproportionately attacked” (Kuromiya 713). In 1984 average people were taken away, never to be seen or heard from again. Typically, this would induce mass fear within the nation; however, the brainwashing conducted by the government allowed this to be presented as a necessary act of national security. In addition, Kuromiya explains that “In the two years of 1937 and 1938, according to official Soviet data, 790,665 and 554,258 people were indicted respectively for political crimes” (Kuroyima 713). One essential method that the Soviets used to break down their society was to influence people to give up others once arrested. In doing so, the government could essentially implicate anybody they pleased with conspiracy against the state. (Grossman 45) This differs from the situation in 1984 as The Party needs not to have those captured leak their co-conspirators. The Party is all-knowing and does not need an excuse to send their secret police after specific individuals.

The self can be described as the elements of a person that wholefully make up their individuality. This can include their innermost thoughts, values and emotions. One of the goals of the government of Oceania is to harness that self, and contort it into what they deem as fit in their vision of society. In doing so, they destroy the self. This is one of the primary reasons that The Party is associated as a totalitarian regime. They succeed in their goal of total abolition of the self through various means. In a totalitarian form of government, such as the one displayed in the novel, people are unable to express the basic emotional and mental components that make up an individual. It is generally one run by a ruthless elite who maintain complete control over every aspect of the people’s lives. In Orwell’s 1984, the citizens of Oceania cannot express their innermost feelings and thoughts. They are told what and whom they may love and hate. When there is no free expression, there is no individuality. The regime acknowledges no limitations on its authority. There is no sense of freedom in which people have choices to do or even think as they wish, less they be crushed by the state. When there is no individuality, people are nothing more than robots operating on auto-pilot by and for the ruling elite. The self has become nothing more than a farm animal, constantly working towards the goal of the master, with no mind to think otherwise.

Three major parts play into the breakdown of humanity in Orwell’s dystopian nightmare. The first being the various tools that The Party uses in order to carry out its totalitarian regime. These methods include all the physical ways that typical totalitarian governments have used in order to maintain control. The technology that The Party possessed supported their campaign against humanity. The second section includes the relationship between Winston and Julia. This relationship exemplifies the burning flame in the darkness that must be extinguished. Their relationship represents a symbol of defiance to authority in a world where be none. Finally, the torture of Winston is the culminating product of the psychological domination that The Party carries out upon its people. The events that occur in Room 101 provide insight into the true goal of a totalitarian establishment. These three sections result in Orwell providing a warning and a message to the danger to humanity and the human spirit if people turn a blind eye.

~The Tools of Destruction~

“War is Peace. Freedom is Slavery. Ignorance is Strength” (Orwell 4).

One of the primary examples of government oppression includes the concept of Newspeak. Newspeak is a new language based off of Oldspeak (English) that has been simplified and modified greatly. This is a crucial tool that The Party utilizes to maintain totalitarian rule over people. With it, they can subtly break down society to their fitting. In doing so, people become unable to express certain emotions and philosophies that would go against what the party wishes. This keeps the people in line so much so that they can’t even think about rebellion. Syme, the character who is working on writing up the dictionary of Newspeak explains what his job entails “You think, I dare say that our chief job is inventing new words. But not a bit of it! We’re destroying words-scores of them, hundreds of them, every day. We’re cutting the language down to the bone.” He goes on to note that “It’s a beautiful thing, the destruction of words.” The example that he gives to better allow Winston to understand it is “If you have a word like ‘good’ then what need is there a word for ‘bad’? Ungood will do just as well-better, because it’s an exact opposite” (Orwell 51). In this particular case, Syme is dumbing down the language for people, which will create simpletons. Simple-minded people are easier to manipulate. The destruction of language is something that has always gone hand-in-hand with control. We as people need extensive language to express our freedoms and thoughts. The evolution and expansion of language is what furthers intellectual thinking which results in progressive action. When the opposite occurs, we are left unable to fully communicate our thoughts. Syme gets to the crux of this section, in which he explains why The Party specifically is making Newspeak the only language:

Don’t you see that the 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 which to express it…How could you have a slogan like ‘freedom is slavery when the concept of freedom has been abolished?…In fact there will be no thought, as we understand it now. Orthodoxy means not thinking-not needing to think. Orthodoxy is unconsciousness. (Orwell 53)

Those who refuse to acknowledge Newspeak, such as Julia, show that they are rebellious in the fact that they are unwilling to conform to this extreme method of control. Winston himself realizes that Newspeak is simply another tool used by The Party to strengthen its autonomy. Today, Newspeak is often referenced as a criticism of people who attempt to use made-up words in order to persuade others into buying their rhetoric. How a person both uses and views language helps in forming their identity. There is much that can be learned about a person by analyzing their choice in words, and how they choose to articulate themselves. In the case of Julia talking to Winston, she often expresses the liberal voice buried deep inside of her. Even simple phrases such as “I love you” show how she uses language to her advantage, even when it is deemed inappropriate. (Orwell 108)

The primary issue, however, is that people will always cling on to their preexisting language and culture. Language is something that evolves over the course of many generations. The Party, knowing this, introduces Newspeak to the populous in media, specifically to the children in hopes that over generations it will eventually become the only language available. Newspeak is distinctively designed to lack emotion, thus taking the human aspect away from it. Once the human aspect is removed, people can more easily be molded into perfect working machines for The Party. There is no possible way to denounce The Party, as there is no language in existence to do so. When there are no words to express negativity, the concepts of freedom and rebellion cannot possibly exist. It is a malicious, yet ingenious way to control people. Similarly, Joseph Stalin tried to unify his entire nation under the Soviet Union brand, where Russian was the primary method of communication and pushing out Western culture was encouraged. People were not allowed to express their individuality, and had to become a cog in the Soviet machine. Personal freedoms were prohibited, and everything was controlled by the state under the flagship of Soviet nationalism. The similarities between Oceania’s Inner Party and The USSR’s Soviet government are striking. Just as how within the Soviet Union, one would forcibly silenced for speaking out against the government, those also under Party rule would face similar consequences.

Orwell’s own thoughts on language are very prominent in this section. In an essay titled Politics and the English Language, he notes that “Our civilization is decadent and our language-so the argument runs-must inevitably share in the general collapse.” He goes on to explain that “If one gets rid of these bad habits one can think more clearly, and to think clearly is a necessary first step towards political regeneration” (Orwell 156–157). This can be seen during Winston’s interrogation. As a result of the torture, his words and thoughts become so disorientated that he is unable to salvage his mind. As his mind attempts to fight off the invasion, he begins to lose himself. In 1984, Newspeak is used as an example of what happens when we allow our language to degenerate. Language goes hand-in-hand with political and social liberation. Orwell claims that modern writing “consists in gumming together long strips of words which have already been set in order by someone else, and making the results presentable by sheer humbug. The attraction of this way of writing is that it is easy” (Orwell 164). In short, he abhors the concept of rewashing metaphors for the sake of clarity. He encourages writers to create their own new concepts that paint a more vivid and fresh painting into the mind of the audience. Reflecting back on Newspeak, when such a language is implemented, this can most certainly not occur. All language is simple and mirrored to itself. Orwell’s ideas about English and language in general stem from his own upbringing. Christopher Hitchens explains that “Having endured what is often called a ‘conventional’ English education (‘conventional’, presumably, because it applies to a microscopic percentage of the population), he did not make the traditional progress to a medieval university, and having chosen the alternative, the colonial service, he abruptly deserted it” (Hitchens 8). Despite getting a standard education as a social elite, Orwell rejected conformity and decided to walk his own path, writing about his political and social views from experience.

In respect to the totalitarian regimes of his time, Orwell presumes that “I should expect to find-this is a guess which I have not sufficient knowledge to verify-that German, Russian and Italian languages have all deteriorated in the last ten or fifteen years, as a result of dictatorship” (Orwell 167). If his ideas on language are in fact true, than the destruction of language within Oceania must have had a similar effect on the people of the aforementioned regimes, especially Russia.

One of the most well known and dramatized tools that The Party uses are the telescreens and microphones. With the exception of the Prole areas, there are telescreens and microphones everywhere you go. They are always watching and listening to your every movement. You are constantly under watch so that there is absolutely no possible way to step out of line. This futuristic technology is something that only the most totalitarian government would use. The mass surveillance in order to combat political resistance in 1984 resembles the same type of spying used by the Soviet Union. What this does psychologically to the people is that they can never be able to act as themselves, as they are always under constant surveillance. This means that people have to always act as perfect automatons to The Party, even when by themselves. Throughout the novel, wherever the environment is described a telescreen is sure to be mentioned. In people’s homes, parks, workplaces etc. Unsurprisingly, the brainwashed masses even tend to flock towards the surveillance. They seek it out. Prior to his conversation with Syme, Orwell makes careful to note that he led him to a table underneath a telescreen. (Orwell 50) This is to ensure that their conversation will be monitored, which forces Winston to choose his words carefully when discussing a controversial subject such as Newspeak. Winston knows that he can not outright say anything that could be construed as against Party ideology. There is no true humanity within Oceania. Often, people refer to this public surveillance by the government today when explaining the malicious actions by the United States government in a post Patriot Act and Edward Snowden world. The fear is that if the government is allowed to continue these spying programs on average citizens, we are moving towards an Orwellian-esque dystopia.

In his piece titled The New Barbarians: Totalitarianism, Terror and the Left Intelligentsia in Orwell’s 1984 John David Frodsham attempts to rationalize George Orwell’s fears and warnings. He writes about Orwell’s perception of government and power as a response to the various totalitarian regimes around the world that dehumanize and terrorize society. Specifically, he lists Hitler’s Germany, Stalin’s Soviet Union, Mao’s China, and Pol Pot’s Kampuchea. Frodsham makes particular note of Orwell’s representation of the public masses in 1984: “Confronted with this towering edifice of death, the writer finds himself bereft of his art…This was Orwell’s method in 1984: to make of Winston Smith and Julia an Everyman and an Everywoman; to shadow forth through their destruction by the state the annihilation of so many anonymous others” (Frodsham 141). He then goes on to give various real-world examples such as the VAT, and state surveillance that are ironically very similar to the technology used by the Party in order to control people, thus dehumanizing society. (Frodsham 142) These totalitarian governments are the predecessors to Orwell’s vision of the future. They were not perfect, as their violent methods allowed room for resistance. Unlike these examples, the government of Oceania carries out its totalitarian rule by targeting the mind of the masses.

Another crucial way that The Party manages to shred humanity and control in 1984 is by enforcing the popular phrase “Big Brother is watching you.” This envelopes the various tools that The Party utilizes to spy on, and keep the population in check. These tools are extremely reminiscent of the same very ones that the Soviet Union used in order to quash any rebellion. Even the way that Big Brother himself is described is a direct representation of Joseph Stalin himself: “It depicted an enormous face, more than a meter wide: the face of a man of about forty-five, with a heavy black mustache and ruggedly handsome features” (Orwell 1).

Probably the most disturbing tactic that The Party has employed to maintain authority is the introduction of Thought Crime via the Thought Police. The Party has gone so far as to make various thoughts illegal and employs a secret police consisting of children and Inner Party members to spy on people and if they are suspected of thoughtcrime are taken out of society, usually never to be seen again. This a direct allegory to Stalin’s secret spying police force The People’s Commissariat for Internal Affairs, a branch of the KGB. Similarly, the forced labour camps described by Winston resemble the Gulags of the Soviet Union. In Oceania, children would often watch their parents sleep, and if they suspected them of having negative thoughts during their sleep about The Party, they would have them arrested. This perpetuates a constant cycle of fear within the country, further diminishing basic humanity. One example of this can be found whilst Winston is rotting in his cell waiting for something to happen. To his dismay, the man Parsons had been arrested as well for thoughtcrime. According to him, in his sleep he chanted “Down with Big Brother”, to which his young daughter overheard and had him arrested accordingly. The most frightening part of this exchange is how pleasant he was with his situation. In fact, he was proud of his daughter for it shows that he “brought her up in the right spirit” (Orwell 233). After that, Parsons was never mentioned again.

Winston Smith’s job itself is a method that The Party uses to manipulate the people. He works in the Ministry of Truth rewriting documents and history in favour of The Party. He falsifies facts, creates people that never existed and helps to delete people from history. Orwell notes an order that Winston received from the higher ups: “The reporting of Big Brother’s order for the Day in the Times of December 3rd 1983 is extremely unsatisfactory and makes references to nonexistent persons. Rewrite it in full and submit your draft to higher authority before filing” (Orwell 44). Here, the direct order to rewrite history as if a person never existed can be seen. The Party directly commands Winston to alter reality, so that people can never know the truth. If all remnants of the truth are falsified, then the new, artificial truth becomes reality. The Party constantly changes things, such as the amount of chocolate ration people can have, and who they are at war with. The actual truth does not really matter. What only matters is that people must suddenly take what is told them, and believe it to be true. Everybody must forget what previously had been claimed as truth, as there is now no evidence of the past in existence. The Party is literally changing the timeline of events, and thus changing history.

If The Party says that it invented airplanes, then it invented airplanes. There is no possible way to debate it, since there is no evidence to prove otherwise. All facets of media are controlled like this. Since there are no records of the true past, and only what the Party says, people have no other choice than to believe it. As The Party slogan goes “Who controls the past controls the future; who controls the present controls the past” (Orwell 248). “All history was a palimpsest, scraped clean and reinscribed exactly as often as was necessary. In no case would it have been possible, once the deed was done, to prove that any falsification had taken place” (Orwell 40). Not only is he to delete and rewrite facts, Winston also creates people that never even existed. One example of this is when Winston documents an entire imaginary life that he had come up with for an imaginary soldier named Comrade Ogilvy, who fought bravely for Oceania and was a stand out, superb model of what a citizen should be- Loyal to the Party until the very end. “Comrade Ogilvy, who never had existed in the present, now existed in the past” (Orwell 47). This is simply another form of oppression that The Party utilizes. In creating an ideal individual, all people seek to live up to this perfect specimen. Since humans are naturally flawed organisms, it is virtually impossible to become Ogilvy. However, people constantly try to live up to this name to prove their worth to the state and fail. This creates a social dynamic of repressed self-hatred within the self.

Even though Winston knew that he had seen a photograph of three rebels known as Jones, Aaronson and Rutherford, The Party wiped them from existence. As O’Brien explains to Winston “[The Photograph] It never existed. I do not remember it” (Orwell 247). It was considered doublethink to try and recall something that in reality, had existed but since then The Party has removed it from the annals of history. This perpetuates free thought and a lack of control. The Party cannot have that. In life, the only things that exist are what The Party tells you exist. Nothing more and nothing less. Even if you knew it at one point to be true, if it is not in the present, then it never was true.

Party ideology is something that has long been a topic of conversation among scholars of the novel, along with how it affects the dystopian and utopian world in terms of Orwell’s vision. In his essay entitled The Dynamics of Terror in Orwell’s 1984 Malcolm Thorp attempts to “explore the methods of totalitarian control envisioned in Orwell’s famous anti-utopian projection into the future of world politics” (Thorp 4). He also goes on to explain the key difference between Orwell’s totalitarianism, and the ones of the real world. “The sole purpose of the Party is to manipulate power on behalf of the managerial elite within the state…This group differs from its totalitarian predecessors in that Ingsoc hierarchy is chosen solely on the basis of the party member’s ability to assist the state” (Thorp 9). He goes on to note: “The Party determines what is truth…The party can make people believe anything that it wants them to. Logical inconsistencies that cannot be eradicated through control of information are rationalized through the intellectual device of doublethink…Individual interpretations of truth are heresies, in the eyes of the Party; the truth must be interpreted for you. Free agency does not exist” (Thorp 11).

As with all liberties, in this dystopia there is absolutely no religion allowed. The only figure worshipable is Big Brother. Even the outside mention of any sort of organized religion from the past was strictly prohibited and resulted in severe punishment. The poet Ampleforth was a victim of this. When asked why he was thrown in jail by Winston his response was “We were producing a definitive edition of the poems of Kipling. I allowed the word ‘God’ at the end of a line” (Orwell 230–231). This is in direct relation to the laws within the Soviet Union and Communist China. In these two communist states, there was no freedom of religion. Abstract ideas such as religion had no place, and would only distract the people from working for the government. Also, it is supposed to represent a rejection of traditional western values, in which freedom of religion is often held as sacred. Orwell’s choice in using the words of Rudyard Kipling are not arbitrary. Kipling’s poetry and political agenda was something that he had studied greatly. In an essay simply titled Rudyard Kipling he notes that “And yet the ‘Fascist’ charge has yet to be answered, because the first clue to any understanding of Kipling, morally or politically, is the fact that he was not a Fascist” (Orwell 117) He goes on to claim that Kipling was very realistic in his views on war and the common man.

Ironically, the totalitarian state shares many similarities with that of organized, extremist theocracies. The infinite power to control people’s free will within a totalitarian state is similar to the autonomy that religion attempts to grasp. In an autonomous state, people often fall into line out of fear of physical brutality. Whereas in religion, they are shamed into following the guidelines dictated by the theology as well as submitting to the terror of being judged in the afterlife. Attempting to dictate someone’s morality and life by telling them that they will face retribution at the hands of a higher power is no different than forcing them to surrender their soul to a totalitarian regime. Both use widespread manipulation of reality and fear mongering. In many cases, they also both resort to violent tactics when the propaganda fails. The Party carries out both of these tactics. It shames people into attempting to become ideal citizens by creating false perceptions of perfections, such as the case with comrade Ogilvy. In addition, it also physically brutalizes people. Both of these tactics are used by extreme religion and extreme government alike.

There is a perspective of reading 1984 from a biblical viewpoint. To make the analogy more clear Gorman Beauchamp explains in his essay titled Of Man’s Last Disobedience: Zamiatin’s We and Orwell’s 1984.” He begins by describing what a utopia is to him: “Utopia can be defined as civilization-only-more-so: that is, as a systematic intensification of the restraints upon which society rests” (Beauchamp 285). In doing so, he can begin a conversation on Orwell’s dystopian nightmare, and the opposite, what Orwell’s unique utopia would consist of. He uses popular biblical stories in order to represent the figures within 1984. Specifically, when discussing sexuality and instinctual freedom, Beuchamp notes that “Orwell’s Winston Smith, like Zamiatin’s D-503, is the last Adam, reenacting the myth of the Fall, following his Eve into disobedience against God.” He also goes on to compare the Two-Minute Hate to religious prayer, as well as Goldstein to Satan. In addition, Julia obviously represents Winston’s Eve. (Beauchamp 293) In his next comparison, Beauchamp compares Party ideology, such as sexual repression to the chastity found within the Church among nuns and monks alike. He then refers back to Julia, in saying that “In this respect, the biblical myth and novel’s mythos are the same: it is an Eve who lures Adam to sin against God” (Beauchamp 294). To conclude his analogy, Beauchamp notes that “The Dystopian novel, to warn against such a totalitarian tomorrow, posits the existence of utopia: a world where Eros is reserved for the State alone, where Adam will have no Eve, where Eden will be inescapable, where the Fall will be as unimaginable as freedom. Utopia’s dawning will signal an end to man’s disobedience, and paradise, alas, will be regained” (Beauchamp 298).

The utopian and dystopian genres are two coinciding forms of literature that attempt to grapple at man’s vision of a perfect or nightmarish society. Orwell’s 1984 represents the dystopian discourse that man may find himself living in, in the future. His warning comes from a political standpoint that if given enough power, totalitarian governments will create an inescapable dystopia. Often, the state will present their dystopian society as a utopian one, giving an illusion of reality. Realistically however, there is no possibility of a true utopia. It is an impossible pipe dream, as one man’s utopia is often another’s dystopia.

~Love and Lost~

“If they could make me stop loving you-that would be the real betrayal” (Orwell 166).

What makes 1984 not only a great political work, but a great literary work as well is the common theme of sexuality and romance being used as a liberating tool. This can be seen throughout literature. For example, the transcendentalist movement in the late 19th century. One of the other methods that The Party uses in order to shatter humanity is by not allowing people to form intimate bonds. The primary way that Winston rebels against The Party is through his taboo relationship with the young Julia. Their relationship is itself a symbol of resistance against Party ideology and rule. The most central theme throughout the novel is the idea of love, and sexual desire being deeply connected to humanity. Winston explains that the Party strictly forbid this, as a way to kill human instinct and thus humanity. The Party aimed to remove love entirely from humanity. Love could not exist between people, only love for Big Brother. Winston describes his and Julia’s sexual deviancy: “Their embrace had been a battle, the climax a victory. It was a blow struck against the Party. It was a political act (Orwell 126). Sex was meant to be nothing more than procreation to create more machines for The Party.

Winston struggles with this throughout the text, as he is able to understand love and yearns for it despite it being strictly outlawed. The ability to love in the manner that humans do and engage in such erotic behaviour is something that gives us free thought. It is a defining factor in the humanization of people. Julia symbolizes the freedom that should exist in the world, and acts as a catalyst within Winston to further denounce Big Brother and The Party. “The aim of the Party was not merely to prevent men and women from forming loyalties which it might not be able to control. Its real, undeclared purpose was to remove all pleasure from the sexual act” (Orwell 65). Here, the narrator explains that The Party had managed to control human instinct, something otherwise thought unfathomable. Human instinct is what separates us from animals, and more specifically, machines. The Party wants the people to become machines to work for the state, with no distractions or emotions to get in the way of their job. Winston and Julia’s relationship is seen as a direct foil to when Winston attempted to have sexual relations with his wife, Katherine. She embodied everything that The Party expected, and demanded in a woman in society. Winston recalls a disturbing memory of her:

She has without exception the most stupid, vulgar, empty mind that he had ever encountered. She had not a thought in her head that was not a slogan…As soon as he touched her she seemed to wince and stiffen. To embrace her was like embracing a jointed wooden image…She used to even remind him of it in the morning, as something which had to be done that evening and which must not be forgotten. She had two names for it. One was “Making a baby” and the other was “our duty to the Party” (Orwell 66–67).

There was no love or romanticism to their marriage, only devotion to Big Brother. This is precisely the type of relationship that The Party wants, and that disturbs Winston. Although he hated her for her robotic personality, the thought of her still pops into his head on occasion. He despised the sexual repression of Katherine, and comparatively loved the sexual freedom that Julia expressed.

As a result of the complete control of the individual, people are forced to present a false self to society. They must always hide their true self, at the risk of facing persecution. Julia is a character that distinctly embodies this. The true self and false self concepts are something that were coined by psychoanalyst Donald Winnicott in 1960 in his book titled Playing and Reality. In part, these concepts expanded upon the ideas of the id, ego and superego explained by Sigmund Freud. The true self is the person inside of you that is how you really feel and think. The false self is the self that you show to the world in order to gain a specific reaction or satisfaction from. Julia Ironically, is a propagandist for the Junior Anti-Sex League. On the outside, she is a zealous Party supporter and follower of their ideology. This is the false self that she presents to the world. In reality, she is harshly critical of The Party’s methods to destroy individualism. She is a sexually free person who enjoys pleasure with many partners. This is her true self. This true self must be kept between her and Winston. In the few moments of privacy that they share, she is often seen denouncing Party control. Julia firmly believes in the power of the human spirit and mind. She claims that In response to their love for each other “They can’t do that, It’s the one thing they can’t do. They can make you say-anything- but they can’t make you believe it. They can’t get inside you” (Orwell 166). This insight into her thought process further sheds light onto Julia’s true self. Her engagements with Winston unleash his latent rebellious nature.

Similar to Julia, Winston’s false self is that of a quiet, decent Party member. He silently carries out his duties, as per his job. He rarely is seen having any sort of outburst. However, Julia’s courageous nature to go out of her way to show Winston her true self fuels him to fight back against Party ideology. His course of action is significantly different than hers, however. Rather than engaging in physical rebellion, he decides that the best route would be to simply gain knowledge. In the back of his mind, Winston always knew that something was inherently wrong with the system. Since he is one of the few people who’s job is to falsify past records, he knows much of the truth. Deep inside his mind, he understands what The Party is doing and that it is tearing down human individualism and free thought. Winston constantly seeks validation of the truths in his mind and how he can expose it. This is why he visits the Prole area and questions an old man on his memory of life before The Party seized control. It is also why he was extremely excited and happy to read Emmanuel Goldstein’s book on the truth behind Party power. This is the true self of Winston, a truth-seeker who wishes to learn not just what is happening, but more importantly, why. This can be seen in his reaction to reading the glorious piece of text that he was given by O’Brien that outlined how The Party came into power and what they had done to strip away the humanity of its population. “He had still, he reflected, not learned the ultimate secret. He understood how; he did not understand why” (Orwell 217). The Party’s goal, as O’Brien later reveals during Winston’s torture, is essentially to rid the true self and replace it with the false self, making the false self the new true self. Winston’s self becomes distorted once he is arrested and taken in for psychological cleansing.

~Breaking Point~

“Do it to Julia! Do it to Julia! Not me! Julia! I don’t care what you do to her” (Orwell 286).

The torture of Winston Smith exposes The Party’s true goals. It represents the final product of totalitarianism, and what humanity is left with if allowed to flourish. Through means of mental anguish, The Party coerces people to abandon their true self, shedding their last bit of humanity. In doing so, The Party forces the people to destroy the self within them. It believes that the true self is similar to a disease that must be cured in order to maintain order within their distorted society. Although it may seem overdramatized on an individual basis, given the right circumstances this sort of psychological brainwashing is a viable tactic used by totalitarian regimes on a wide scale. Those who attempt to live their true self are deemed insane. O’Brien explains precisely that: “Shall I tell you why we have brought you here? To cure you! To make you Sane! Will you understand, Winston that no one whom we bring to this place ever leaves our hands uncured?…We do not merely destroy our enemies; we change them. Do you understand what I mean by that?” (Orwell 253)

The Party’s goal isn’t to crush opposition, that would not suffice their lust for power. In reality, their true goal is to consume the human soul and mind, not body. Winston’s mental torture is meant to transform him into another drone of society. O’Brien shows Winston that each speck of rebellion in his life was implanted there by The Party itself. He wrote the Goldstein book, the documents and photos that Winston worked on were fake, and that there is no Brotherhood. The Party is immortal, and everything is under their rule. However, there is one thing that Winston knew was a reality. That was his love, freedom and humanity with Julia. In order to break down that humanity, O’Brien ironically uses the natural fears that are deeply embedded within humanity to destroy humanity. During his interrogation with Winston, O’Brien explains that “We control life, Winston, at all its levels. You are imagining that there is something called human nature which will be outraged by what we do and will turn against us. But we create human nature. Men are infinitely malleable…Humanity is the Party” (Orwell 269). The totalitarian government has become the very essence of humanity. What was humanity in the past has ceased to exist, as with any remnants of it. There is nothing left but The Party, not even repressed memories. In response to Winston’s opposition of this ideal, O’Brien continues to explains that he, attempting to rebel is “the guardian of the human spirit” and that his utterly broken down form is symbolic of what is left of humanity. (Orwell 272)

Winston is eventually broken and betrays Julia, which is the final nail in the coffin. Despite all the physical and mental torture, Winston always believed that his natural, human love for Julia would be salvageable. O’Brien’s goal was to destroy that, which was Winston’s last remaining bit of humanity. After all he had done and promised, his own mind, body and fears betrayed him and he betrayed his love. This is how The Party wins, to make you betray yourself. Afterwards, there is nothing left but a shell of a person who desires nothing but to embrace the government. Beauchamp’s analyzation of the climax includes “O’Brien systematically undercuts and refutes every belief Winston held, Beats and brainwashes away every trace of human dignity, until he is left with only one vestige of humanity, his love for Julia.” He goes on to explain precisely why this last shred of Winston must be decimated: “Winston hopes to be shot quickly, so that he will die still hating Big Brother, still loving Julia. But O’Brien understands this, too. It is not Winston’s life he wants, but his soul, what is ‘inside him.’ Winston thus must be made to betray Julia, for only then can he be made to love Big Brother-must be emptied of one love to be filled with another” (Beauchamp 296). As long as the totalitarian figurehead exists, there may be no room for other emotional distractions. All resources and energy must be directed towards the common goal of the government. Once this is accomplished, there is no strain of humanity remaining.

Malcolm Thorp supports the argument that the mind and soul must be completely broken down in order to achieve total control by stating that “Smashing faces with rubber truncheons is only one aspect of terror, perhaps not even the most important. Winston Smith’s struggle is not impaired by physical force, but by the more subtle means of creating intellectual disorientation” (Thorp 16). Winston’s experiences in Room 101 highlight this, as even he, the intellectual outlier of The Party was forced to submit defeat against The Party’s all-powerful manipulation. This was achieved by preying on his deepest subconscious fears.

One major criticism of 1984 that many people have is the realism and lengths that The Party goes through in order to obtain its goals. Some argue that the steps taken are far too dramatic, and that an omnipotent government would not have to take such drastic measures. Aldous Huxley, author of the novel Brave New World shares this criticism in a letter to Orwell. He claims that “The ruling oligarchy will find less arduous and wasteful ways of governing and of satisfying its lust for power, and these ways will resemble those which I described in Brave New World” (Huxley). The less than subtle psychological incarceration of the mind noted in 1984 is a real plausibility. In reality, it may not be so apparent. The brainwashing experienced in reality is one that is often unseen.

Many people today argue that George Orwell’s 1984 is most certainly becoming a reality. Mass surveillance similar to that in the novel has become true in the 21st century as the actions of entities such as the National Security Agency and the Government Communications Headquarters have been leaked to the public. In a sense, America’s Guantanamo Bay facility daringly resembles the vicious torture that westerners have long since denounced. Governments have contorted the media to brainwash people similar to how The Party had done, so that the public willingly accepts these malicious programs. It seems as though we find ourselves on a direct course to totalitarian enslavement, but carried out much more subtle than Orwell feared. As the American government in particular continues to persecute those who try to warn the public of totalitarian injustice such as Edward Snowden, Chelsea Manning and Julian Assange, we run the risk of slipping further and further into the horrors depicted in 1984. As Assange best puts it “The world is not sliding, but galloping into a new transnational dystopia. This development has not been properly recognized outside of national security circles. It has been hidden by secrecy, complexity and scale.”

Orwell’s message and warning still heavily echo throughout our contemporary society. As we as a civilization progress into a more advanced society, our suffering has skyrocketed, despite the numerous technological evolutions. As a result of oppressive governments, the pain felt by humans has reached an all-time high. With the exception of the elite, the majority of people in some sense are slaves to the power. Orwell’s projections have been slowly proving true. People typically go through life and blindly accept the political decree given to them, or at the most voice a slight protest. If this continues, then Orwell’s vision shall become an inevitable reality. One day, you may wake up and realize that the world you live in is not the one that you knew. However, it may be too late to stop the power of Big Brother. The world as you know it is slipping away into a hellish nightmare, lacking any sort of individualism and the civil liberties that we hold dear.

Work Cited

Assange, Julian, Jacob Appelbaum, Andy MuÌller-Maguhn, and JeÌreÌmie Zimmermann. Cypherpunks: Freedom and the Future of the Internet. New York: OR, 2012. Print.

Beauchamp, Gorman. “Of Man’s Last Disobedience: Zamiatin’s “We” and Orwell’s “1984”

Comparative Literature Studies 10.4 (1973): 285–301. Jstor

Frodsham, John David. “The New Barbarians: Totalitarianism, Terror and the Left Intelligentsia in Orwell’s 1984.” World Affairs 147.3 (1984): 139–60. Jstor

Grossman, Peter Z. “The Dilemma of Prisoners: Choice during Stalin’s Great Terror, 1936–38.”

The Journal of Conflict Resolution, vol. 38, no. 1, 1994, pp. 43–55. Jstor

Hitchens, Christopher. Why Orwell Matters. New York: Basic, 2002. Print.

Huxley, Aldous. Letter to George Orwell. 21 Oct. 1949.

Kuromiya, Hiroaki. “Stalin and His Era.” The Historical Journal, vol. 50, no. 3, 2007, pp. 711– 724. Jstor

Winnicott, D. W. Playing and Reality. New York: Basic, 1971. Print.

Orwell, George, and Erich Fromm. Nineteen Eighty-four: A Novel. New York: Penguin, 1977.

Print.

— -. A Collection of Essays. Politics and the English Language. San Diego: Harcourt Brace

Jovanovich, 1953. Print.

— -. A Collection of Essays. Rudyard Kipling. San Diego: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1953. Print.

Thorp, Malcolm R. “The Dynamics of Terror in Orwell’s “1984”” Brigham Young University

Studies24.1 (1984): 3–17. Jstor