Reviews with content warning for Suicidal thoughts - 1984

To be honest, I kind of feel like George Orwell gaslighted me. The first half of this book was just---bad. I didn't like it. Not in the slightest.

Winston would randomly get this urge to either rape or kill people who did nothing else but exist in his presence. It was tiring, not thought-provoking. I liked him much better in part three of the book, though! Ironically enough, maybe, but his whole character during part one and two was being a pig. That was completely out of focus during part three! Splendid.

Julia should have been removed entirely. I didn't like her in the beginning, and I didn't like her at the end. Her whole character was having sex and saying foul things. If you try too hard to make a character who's supposed to be controversial and rebellious, you end up with a character I only want to die in a pit.

O'Brien.🫶 He saved the book, to be honest. I genuinely believe that this book would have been 5 stars for me if Orwell had removed Julia and spent more time building on Winston and O'Brien's relationship instead.

All in all, I do believe that this book was worth it. I read it for history, and during the first half, I thought of this book as complete and utter bullshit. But at least I came to like it—really like it towards the end.

Content Warnings

susie_reads's review against another edition

Go to review page

challenging dark emotional informative sad tense slow-paced

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

4.5

The additional essays at the back of the book are excellent. They are about the use of language-in the book and in real life; the dropping of the atom bomb; and several short items written by Orwell’s contemporaries to him or about him. The extensive notes section is also helpful.

Content Warnings

iwishihadmoretimetoread's review against another edition

Go to review page

challenging dark reflective sad 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? Yes

4.0

This book is an amazing work of art and I think it is important for everyone to read it, however it was quite difficult to get through and very difficult emotionally.

Content Warnings

kendal_reads's review against another edition

Go to review page

dark reflective 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

natalia64's review against another edition

Go to review page

dark reflective sad tense medium-paced

Plot- or character-driven? A mix
Strong character development? Yes
Loveable characters? It's complicated
Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

3.0

Tiene cosas muy interesantes y vigentes para las discusiones actuales, pero no me resultó tan alucinante porque ya pasaron muchísimos años de su primera edición y tuvo un impacto muy significativo en la cultura masiva occidental - había ideas que me parecían interesantes, pero conocidas. No me resultaron tan atrapantes los fragmentos tan largos de "explicación del regimen" (en particular el capítulo del libro de Goldstein, que está metido dentro del capítulo sin ninguna observación/pensamiento del personaje), me pareció que sumaba más y era mucho más efectivo a nivel idea-experiencia de lectura-efecto de sentido cuando narraba y atravesaba "la teoría" con lo más vivencial del personaje.
La homosexualidad es un tema recurrente en el libro: el Socing lo considera como "poco deseable" y una "desviación". La sexualidad es hetero, pero desligada siempre de todo tipo de deseo - el acto sexual tiene que ser no-placentero y con el único fin de la reproducción. Sin embargo,

Winston, el protagonista, piensa en O'Brien desde que lo comienza a registrar hasta en la misma sala de torturas de una forma que dista la sencilla admiración fraternal. A veces me preguntaba si era que yo estaba leyendo "demás", aberrantemente (Umberto Eco), la relación en un instinto de re-lectura queer (me acordaba del canal Are they gay?) porque cuando mi mamá lo leyó en su momento ni se le cruzó. Cuando pensaba en Julia, incluso en alguna fantasía sexual, empezaba a pensar en O'Brien. Para mí, que se sienta tan "comprendido" cuando O'Brien lo TORTURA es porque le pasan otras cosas. Siento que toda la temática de la homosexualidad de Winston es todo un ejemplo de doblepiensa, salvo que este está tan preparado con las barreras del antecrímen que ni se le ocurre. Si 1984 hubiera sido escrito en el SXXI, hubieran sido un poco más canónicos. Incluso sin perder el mensaje y aumentando la "traición" de O'Brien.

Con respecto al ritmo, se relaciona con lo que decía al principio: cuando es más narrativo, cuando se enfoca en contar ese mundo "desde el cuerpo" me resultó rápidísimo y demasiado interesante. En este sentido creo que el principio, la mitad tardía y el mismo final son los más atrapantes.

Las torturas en el Ministerio del Amor fueron adictivas de leer, visuales, potentes. Llegué tarde a una juntada porque no me di cuenta que había pasado tanto tiempo. Tenía que seguir leyendo para detener el dolor. Con la tortura de la habitación 101 tuve que parar un segundo de leer, consideré dejarlo ahí, pero no pude. Di vuelta la página y me encontré leyendo la restitución a la sociedad de Winston. Primero no entendí, pensaba "debe ser un sueño" y después "debe ser una farsa", no lo pueden haber roto tanto. Fue tristísimo y amargo ese final. Yo seguía esperando una revolución, aunque sea leve, aunque sea emocional. Que cuando vea a Julia, además del vuelco en el corazón (quizá una mínima revolución - la primeridad no la pueden borrar con ninguna tortura), ambos sientan una conexión, una cuestión duradera, la continuidad del flechazo. El mismo personaje lo dice: podrían tener relaciones ahí nomás, en el espacio público, pero son distintos, eso ya no está, la desilusión y la desesperanza le ganaron al deseo, a la utopía y a que valga la pena arriesgarse. En ese pasaje no priman los antecrímenes, como en la escena del bar y Africa.

Con el epílogo me cerró más la postura de Orwell porque me faltaba info de contexto

sobre el partido laborista inglés y pensé que sólo criticaba al stalinismo

. Creo que si lo hubiera leído antes de cursar Historia Social General e Historia Arg no hubiera cazado tanto de las críticas particulares.

Content Warnings

friesenag's review against another edition

Go to review page

adventurous dark emotional informative mysterious sad 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

2.5

1984 is yet another classic with such misogynistic undertones it ruins the story, which honestly I didn't even find good in the first place. These themes aren't groundbreaking as a modern reader but I could see how big of a thing this could be back in the 50s.
Winston is the kind of person who thinks he's above it all and smarter than everyone, but he is so stupid it hurts. <spolier> There is no way that he discerned that O'Brien was a member of the brotherhood from a look and just went with it, and I know in the book they go over that, but I don't think Winston really fully understands his stupidity.
I think that this book could have been amazing and cool, but there was a lack of world building and creation in my opinion. I think Orwell could have done more to share about the physical infrastructure of the community if that makes sense. It felt that there were some very lackluster and half baked story lines that left me asking more questions, and not in a good way.
My major issues were with the character of Julia who was one of two female characters who outwardly states how much she hates women and is SUCH a pick me. When Orwell had that scene about how the women were fighting over pots and pans, Winston discerns that women are just followers and basically have no real feelings about their society like he does, which irritates me so much. How can you tell someones life from how they are fighting over a scarce item?? These women have people to feed, and that doesn't mean that they don't find something wrong with the government?? I felt that women in this book were painted as stupid followers who don't have thoughts and experiences of their own. Even with Julia, who was against big brother but couldn't be bothered to understand the doctrine. This story frustrated me more than anything because of the lack of character development and that Winston's freedom thinking turns into exactly what big brother wanted. The themes of the danger of conformity were interesting, but I hated that it was shown in such a hateful and dislikable way.
I do think Orwell did a good job in the end to create stress and intrigue in the climax of the book, but fell flat as you kinda began to know exactly what was gonna happen.
The only reason this is getting 2.5 stars is because though I hate the characters and found the plot boring, this book did make me feel strong feelings, of irritation, frustration and helplessness as Winston continued to ruin everything in such a overbearing society. Writing is art and art is supposed to make you feel something, even if it is distain.

(Also what was even the point of Winston saying he wants to kill and rape women?? I think that's just Orwells personal feelings and he needed an outlet for saying it.)

Content Warnings

More...