Reviews with content warning for Police brutality - Nineteen Eighty-Four

1984 is a deeply upsetting book. It does not give me hope for the future. By the end of this book, the reader is left with the feeling of having finally reached a handhold at the top of an almost insurmountable summit only to have the bones in your hands systematically crushed by someone you had assumed loved you.
1984 almost makes the unwavering patriotism/belief in a singular person/undefined political ideology, that some of my older family members feel understandable. To see the hero worship for an untouchable ideal that contradicts itself and causes harm without room for critique or progress is painfully relatable for me as an American reader in 2022. I think that crushing dread that there may never be a better world than the one you currently live in with all of its flaws and hardships has been one of the few, traumatic, incorporeal heirlooms that's been passed down for generations.

I really enjoyed the character of Mr. Charrington. I loved the idea of someone lovingly curating ephemeral garbage from generations passed to create a museum of unsellable antiques, and I loved that that persona was an artfully constructed façade for a nefarious character. Orwell drew a brilliant parallel between the telescreen being concealed behind one of the few truly valuable antiques and the thought police officer being behind the studious looking façade that made him look almost like a relic from the past. Behind one of the last few images of the long dead world Winston longed for, which gave him hope for the future, was the symbol and force of the omnipotent presence they thought they were momentarily free from.
I was genuinely convinced that Winston's fear of rats was going to have stemmed from his baby sister being eaten by them. The repeated mentions of proll women not leaving babies unattended for fear they be eaten by rats combined with the thing Winston had been blocking out, the poverty his family lived in in his early childhood, and his mother and sister's disappearance made that thought a tangible possibility.
Winston's character development before his time in prison was quite interesting. Initially, he was internally quite violent and held a deep hatred for the people around him, especially the women. His dreams of bashing in Julia's skull and his distaste for his neighbor's wife mixed with his misogynist internal monologue made Winston an intensely unlikable character for the first part of the book. Julia's complacency with party rules and regulations so long as they didn't interfere with her sex life, her zealously performed orthodoxy that she performed fluidly and without thought made her similarly unlikable at the beginning. Their pre-prison development made them into almost beautiful people, in terms of personality. They were both developing forms of self expression and learning to appreciate the small joys afforded to the prolls that their stations did not allow. Winston's longing for familial past he could barely remember and Julia's desire to break the rules slowly morphed into a tentatively explored new way of life and love that pulled from both the pre-party way of life and engsoc orthodoxy. The total destruction of their sense of selves during and after their time in prison was upsetting to read, but gave the book a satisfying ending. Winston's breaking point being something so benign and mortal as rats humanized him in such a way that it felt like the culmination of his characterization throughout the book. To have the thing that shatters his psyche be something so ingrained into him that all the mind tricks and double think in the world couldn't erase was weirdly oxymoronic. O'Brien's promise was that they would want to confess and die for the party and the love of big brother before they would be killed, and Winston's descent into truly believing party orthodoxy happened in a way that is recognizable in the real world in the reactions of people with zealous, deeply held belief systems.

I'm glad I didn't read this book in high school. I had too much optimism for the fate of the world then. It would have gone right over my head.

Content Warnings

nabilzo's review against another edition

Go to review page

dark reflective tense medium-paced

Plot- or character-driven? A mix
Strong character development? It's complicated
Loveable characters? No
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

4.0

It felt like it starts off pretty slow but later it'll get faster. Not something I'd recommend to read if you need a fun reading experience as it's dark, but if it's your cup of tea then go ahead.

Content Warnings

metanoialaxy's review against another edition

Go to review page

dark emotional mysterious sad tense medium-paced

Plot- or character-driven? Character
Strong character development? Yes
Loveable characters? It's complicated
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated

4.0

Content Warnings

petitemass15's review against another edition

Go to review page

challenging dark reflective tense fast-paced

Plot- or character-driven? Character
Strong character development? Yes
Loveable characters? Yes
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

4.75

Content Warnings

epicwizardz's review against another edition

Go to review page

challenging dark reflective tense medium-paced

Plot- or character-driven? Character
Strong character development? It's complicated
Loveable characters? No
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated

3.75

Content Warnings

zykx's review against another edition

Go to review page

challenging dark slow-paced

Plot- or character-driven? N/A
Strong character development? Yes
Loveable characters? No
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? No

2.5

To answer, "Is this book mainly plot- or character-driven?": neither, it's driven by the setting. The setting is the main highlight of the book, but it doesn't have much else going for it. I didn't like the characters and I'd have difficulty describing what the plot is. The main tension is the fact that Winston is a dead man, figuratively speaking, from the beginning. This isn't a spoiler as it's established in the first couple of pages. He commited a thoughtcrime. A boring exposition and I spent the entire time waiting "for the plot to start". I didn't understand the book while reading the beginning, but I get it now. The middle did not have to drag on as long as it did and some parts that were up to ten pages long, simply did not have to be in the book. For example,

when Winston starts reading Goldstein's book and we get excerpts from chapters one and three to read for ourselves, we don't learn anything new. Similar to how Winston phrases it, it clarifies what we already knew, making it boring and redundant. I wish it wasn't in the book at all. In my opinion it would have made it feel less like a chore to read.

Because of these redundant and unneeded parts, I was counting the pages I had left to read, literally.

The end was good. It gave a much better perspective on the setting than any of the long winded exposition parts did and I appreciated the dive into

how the Ministry of Love worked

as most dystopian novels don't go into

the gory bits of their punishment/brainwashing systems

(that stuff).

The plot twists at the beginning (parts one and two) made sense, and they were believable. Part three was the opposite. In a way, you could argue that was done on purpose, but I didn't feel anything (because I didn't like the characters) and it didn't dwell on it either. Just onto the next thing. This I suppose was just a preference thing similar to how I didn't like the emphasis on sex which, again, made sense, but was kind of mood-breaking because of my immature sense of humor.

(i DIED when O'Brien said "we will abolish orgasms" like bruhhh T-T)

Now onto Winston: I hate him.

Why are you having rape fantasies, you creep. Please leave, exit, and i wish you died. The way he thinks about women is gross and so uncomfortable. Let me just barf right now.

He fits as narrator though. He grants us a good perspective to see Oceanic London through.
Julia was forgettable and slightly annoying.

Controversial opinion that I have decided to hold: we stan Mr. Charrington

As a political commentary, it's good. It's the whole reason why people like it, recommend it, etc. I'd much prefer to get all of this information from a youtube video essay, however. I suppose from my background of learning about the Gestapo in world history class and the thought provoking video essays I've watched, nothing feels new here. The ideology of Ingsoc was well developed and interesting along with the history of Oceania.

2.5 stars because it wasn't enjoyable. I would recommend people to read it though, just once to get it over with. 1984 is definitely very fun to talk about and the discussions that stem from it are some of the more fun ones I've had over books.

Content Warnings

ghostlyprince's review against another edition

Go to review page

dark mysterious reflective tense slow-paced

Plot- or character-driven? Character
Strong character development? It's complicated
Loveable characters? No
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

3.0

Content Warnings

evicteline's review against another edition

Go to review page

challenging dark mysterious reflective tense medium-paced

Plot- or character-driven? Plot
Strong character development? Yes
Loveable characters? It's complicated
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

4.5

Content Warnings

More...