1984

Rating:
Summary: Timeless
Review: When it was written in 1948, Before the Cold War, Communism was a popular idea in England. Orwell, who favored Trotsky over Stalin, faught in the Spanish Civil War and fled for his live because of Stalins rise to power. Orwell considered himself a Socialist, but he warns of socialism to the extreme. This book is a testament to mankind's willingness to forget the past.

Rating:
Summary: My Favorite Book
Review: I thought it was going to be a cheesy nostradomus-type thing, but it turned out to be a book about the rebellious nature of the human mind, as well as a testament to the number of those who do not understand those things going on around them (the proles). I've read it four times, and it never loses its impact.

Rating:
Summary: It was a very good description of life during anti-social ti
Review: It was a very good description of life during anti-social time

Rating:
Summary: A Political Prophecy that should be read by all
Review: When I first read 1984 I thought most of the stuff in it was absurd; the thought police, the cameras in each and every street corner and house. But as I read on, I found out that Orwell was using these as instruments to convey a much deeper message about what would become of society, and this message itself about a world that is thought controlled with no tolerance for deviation was much more important than what I considered their more absurd concepts such as the thought police. I really would suggest most people to read this book; the main protaganists Winston and Julia lead a rebellion against an unjust society that I am sure you all will find in your hearts very compelling.

Rating:
Summary: My Favorite Book
Review: Enter a world where there is no past. Where the past is the present. Follow Winston as he thinks THOUGHT- CRIME, works on fake documents, and plots to shut down the system. Big Brother's eyes follow Winston Everywhere he goes. If you want to see wether Winston accomplishes his mission, you must read the book. After you read this book go check out the 1984 Movie. But don't see the Movie unless you've read the book or else you will have no idea what is going on in the movie.

Rating:
Summary: Even after 3 reads, still a superficial book.
Review: "1984" is hailed as the greatest novel of all time. I disagree. Had this been written at a different time, it would have been hailed differently. The fact remains, however, that this was the Cold War and everyone hated Communism. Thus anything that was against it, no matter how false or trivial, was inflated beyond belief. This wasn't limited to 1984; it was present in the case of Solzhenitsyn. Solzhenitsyn wrote a well-written anti-Soviet novel, therefore Solzhenitsyn was hailed as a hero of democracy, even though his subsequent books were mediocre. I do not believe that 1984 is a travesty because it lacks action. I believe that this book is a travesty because it is false.

People say that this novel had an exquisitely crafted plot which readers such as myself are too daft to comprehend. They may be right. However, Orwell did not craft this exquisite plot. It was gleaned from Zamyatin's _We_, for starters. Secondly, this was the topic of the day. _Everyone_ was writing about how bad and evil communism was. _Everyone_ was taking pain to diffuse the utopian philosophies of the previous century. The societies of 1984 and Brave New World are very similar. 1984 and Animal Farm are the same book with the names changed. As I stated originally, the characters of the two novels are identical. Napoleon is Big Brother, or perhaps O'Brien, Boxer is Winston, Snowball is Goldstein, Squealer is Mr. Charrington, etc. Orwell plagiarized himself, Zamyatin, and countless other authors who wrote about the exact same thing.

Orwell was not meaning to denegrate the theory of communism, becuase he was not familiar with the theory of communism. He was meaning to denegrate Russia and socialism and show them exactly the way the West portrayed them. It makes no difference that he was at some point a member of the Communist Party. If you read Richard Wright's _Black Boy_, you will see several Americans who were in the American Communist Party, yet didn't know the ideals they claimed to represent. They were in it for the fun. Ditto George Orwell.

People say that Orwell had to understand a theory that was developed in his own country. I say: pfft. Firstly, many middle-class Americans today believe that excerpts from the Declaration of Independence are Communist propaganda meant to subvert American minds in the Cold War. (You know, the parts that say "all men are created equal"?) Secondly, communism was not developed in England and Karl Marx did not have sole rights to it. The ideas behind it were conceived in the epoch of Enlightenment by French philosophers.

I do not say Orwell is retaliating against anything. That implies he had something against it. I believe he was simply playing upon the mood of the day to please the public. Say what they want to hear and add some sex in there to make it interesting and it will sell. People view him as God's prophet; I view him as a boring, unoriginal one-hit wonder who wanted to make a buck rehashing much-talked-of, much-written-of themes.

Rating:
Summary: Awesome, Scary, Realistic
Review: This book is amazing. The author manages to make you believe in this terrifying futuristic setting while at the same time makes each character real and very human. His explanations of this horrific society make them seem far too real. Even the ending, though not what you would want, you must grudgingly admit is realistic. Once you enter 1984 you will always see 1999 differently

Rating:
Summary: Brilliant & chilling
Review: Even more scary when you realize that Orwell is not just talking about the potential of a totalitarian regime: he's exaggerating an already-existing reality. A truly great book, and doesn't take long to read (I took just a few hours).

Rating:
Summary: MUST-READ
Review: Caters to the paranoia inside you. Everyone should read this book

Rating:
Summary: disturbing and relevant
Review: I'm surprised that Noam Chomsky hasn't been mentioned in any of the 299 previous reviews. Nineteen Eighty-Four is not just a supreme work of art: it is politically relevant, because the phenomena identified by Orwell (doublethink, newspeak, etc.) are, in various forms, actively used today in even the freest societies. Chomsky gives very detailed descriptions of this. "I've repeatedly found," he says, "that when the audience is mostly poor and less educated, I can skip lots of the background ... because it's already obvious and taken for granted by everyone." Curious?