super-retraction

| | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

"as soon as all the corrections which happened to be necessary in any particular number of the Times had been assembled and collated, that number would be reprinted, the original copy destroyed, and the corrected copy  placed on the files in its stead. This process of continuous alteration was applied...to every kind if literature or documentation which might conceivably hold any political or odealogical significance...in this way every prediction made by the Party could be shown by documentary evidence; nor was any item of news, or any expression of opinion, which conflicted with the needs of the movement, ever allowed to remain on record" pg. 41 Orwell

I read this book last semester for PS 228. Obviously I know what is to come, but this section disturbed and struck me above all other events in the book. It really calls into question the trust we place in the media to report correct information. Big Brother is capitalizing on people's trust in order to make himself and the rest of the party seem infallible. It got to Winston, spending day after day falsifying truth. In Oceania, it didn't matter if you witnessed or remembered what really happened; others didn't and you would have to back up your statement with documented evidence. Unfortunately, there is an entire industry of people continually tampering with documentation to make sure your point will never get proven.There are "elaborately equipped studios for the faking of photographs" and "teams of actors specifically chosen for their skill in imitating voices" (43). Then you will just think you remember, as if the truth were just some dream. You would just assume either that you were just imagining the thought or that Emmanuel Goldstein was using mind-control tactics to infiltrate the Party. Instead of printing a retraction, the Party seeks to eliminate all evidence that went against what they now believe. Admitting they were wrong would make the Party seem weak and challengable. Winston's job is sort of an extreme, super retraction. The Party would rather kill (which they do) than admit they were wrong. People are eased out of existence till nothing exists to remind all others that they had once existed.

Fortunately for the Party, thoughtcrime (the rememberance of contradictory material or formulation of new ideas that went against what the Party currently said) would soon be eliminated thanks to newspeak. The elimination of old words was essential to their plan. Rebellious thoughts could not arise because there would no longer exist any words to describe them.

not to be paranoid, but with 1984 and IANS last semester, I'm really beginning to believe what I read with caution...

and now for something completely different:

weird facebook coincidence: someone hacked into my account and sent a spam message to my friends. I went around deleting it and when I clicked delete message, instead of a "message has been deleted" notification, I received a "post does not exist" message.

also, up until I read the assignment blog, I seriously thought that Orson Welles and George Orwell were the same person.

Speaking of Orwell, does anyone remember U.S. Acres? It was a cartoon on Garfield and Friends about a bunch of animals on a farm and the pig was named Orson. coincidence????

 

 

 

0 TrackBacks

Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: super-retraction.

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://blogs.setonhill.edu/mt/mt_tb-awoisdlkfj.cgi/13364

2 Comments

Rachel Prichard said:

Though the destroying of old political documents and the actual changing of history is done in Oceania, it is still just fiction. While yes, it is a crazy and creepy thought, As someone who is hoping to become a part of the media that so many people rally against for so many reasons; I try to not even listen to those that hate the media. What would that say about those of us in this class training to become journalists? Do we not believe in the power of press being used for good?

ChrisU said:

I was watching the Colbert Report last night and Stephen quipped that journalists' favorite news topic is themselves. In many ways, the Party in Orwell's book is just a huge group of journalists, and Stephen's joke certainly applies there. Moreover, ironically enough, the Party never really *lies* so much as it carefully selects and distributes facts in a way that lets it control the news itself.

As for your Facebook problems, Daniella, I sympathize. Unfortunately, new media like Facebook can be abused as much as any other form of communication (a caution justified in 1984).

Leave a comment


Type the characters you see in the picture above.

Recent Comments

ChrisU on super-retraction: I was watching the Colbert Rep
Rachel Prichard on super-retraction: Though the destroying of old p
Powered by Movable Type