Re-writing history
The aftermath of the launch of Trump administration finds George Orwell’s ‘Nineteen Eighty-Four’ climbing up the chart of bestsellers in the US. Re-writing history is one of the critical themes that the incumbent authorities might be attempting as a means of controlling their subordinates.
The novel’s extremely dooming descriptions of a totalitarian regime might evoke an image of evil that is attributable to some extraordinary sects. Nonetheless, as Orwell did not confine the novel only within communist states, readers should reflect upon everyday practices in which they engage themselves, including their familiar assumptions.
In present modernity, we got accustomed to the view of rational individuals. We rarely doubt our capacities of making rational judgments albeit the recognition of errors we might occasionally make. The normal view that we might be making mistakes that are later reparable with rationality is already re-writing histories. So, never blame anyone for re-writing histories.
Still, fabricating facts too much certainly damages the entire society. What are differences between the evil and the normal? Filling up memories with lies could disrupt consistent and coherent identities. But, this is what we are normally doing. A crucial but mostly ignored assumption is that there should be someone who kindly and impartially ensures us of what is the truth.
We have come to underestimate the meaning of our once-occurring acts. It is only acts that prove uniqueness of our being in this world. But, we are concerned with meanings that can be validated along criteria which make meanings exchangeable either universally or locally. In either case, we conceive of reality by re-writing histories in ways that can be valid by reference to certain criteria, such that the truth is assumed to speak for itself insofar as stories satisfy the criteria.
In the past, people were aware of their sins so that confessions at church were part of everyday practices. They sought for a sense of purification, or even for being purged. No matter how weak such might seem, there were communications between men and something unknown but of divinity. In contrast, modern men have become indifferent to anything sacred because of the misunderstanding that rational science is as omnipotent as god. Sciences or rational reasoning deals only with the past so that juggling with data is merely re-writing histories. Relating the issues of fake news and blatant lying to totalitarian regimes and calling the deteriorating situations post-truth are all manifestations of our weaknesses that inevitably seek for the targets of attribution about our anxieties and uncertainties. There is no one but each of us who can bear responsibilities for making truth claims. Blaming for the utterly dishonest leader would do us no good, nor could Mr. Orwell rest in peace if his novel is consumed for fabricating false targets of attribution. Re-writing histories ought to be done in more morally-charged a manner than our innocent ancestors.
