Reviews with content warning for Misogyny - George Orwell's 1984: An Audible Original adaptation

Reviews tagging 'Misogyny'

George Orwell's 1984: An Audible Original adaptation by George Orwell, Joe White

202 reviews

hannahcstocks's review against another edition

4.0

dark informative mysterious reflective sad tense medium-paced

Plot or Character Driven: A mix

Strong character development: Complicated

Loveable characters: No

Diverse cast of characters: No

Flaws of characters a main focus: Complicated

Content Warnings

gvstyris's review against another edition

4.25

challenging dark reflective tense medium-paced

Plot or Character Driven: A mix

Strong character development: Yes

Loveable characters: No

Diverse cast of characters: No

Flaws of characters a main focus: Yes

But if there was hope, it lay in the proles. You had to cling on to that. When you put it in words it sounded reasonable: it was when you looked at the human beings passing you on the pavement that it became an act of faith.

Although I would argue that 1984 is far from the most realistic dystopian novel I have ever read, its influence on popular culture (and the wider genre!) is absolutely undeniable. I was surprised upon re-read how conceptual Orwell's Oceania is: it manages to still read a little like a political manifesto despite lacking Animal Farm's much more explicit allegories. This novel is also incredibly accessible because Orwell really breaks down the world for the reader, which was a welcome change after Dune.

There are a couple areas where 1984 really shined for me. Primarily, newspeak. Orwell aptly portrays language as a tool for control and manipulation, and the appendix's inclusion really made a difference for me. I was also in complete awe of the pages devoted to 'Goldstein's' agenda, which highlight the broader sociopolitical context of this novel so cleverly. They reminded me of The Handmaid Tale's 'Historical Notes' section -- genuinely such a cool way to place Orwell's world within a timeline that the reader is familiar with.

A couple criticisms have turned me off from a higher rating. As pointed out in the afterword of my copy, race is entirely absent from Orwell's world, which is a somewhat bizarre (and unconvincing) choice given its post-Holocaust setting. The misogyny and subtle racism are also pretty distasteful, which I think is important to acknowledge in a novel intending to speculate on the fate of humanity. Julia's character is relatively vapid and disinterested in broader political affairs, which was a struggle for me when contrasted so obviously with Winston's 'intellect.'

That being said, 1984 is absolutely worth the read, and outshines Fahrenheit 451 in almost every way possible...

One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship.

Content Warnings

smile_h0ya's review against another edition

2.75

dark reflective tense

Plot or Character Driven: Plot

Strong character development: No

Loveable characters: No

Diverse cast of characters: No

Flaws of characters a main focus: Yes

Content Warnings

te_ss_i's review against another edition

5.0

dark sad tense medium-paced

Plot or Character Driven: Character

Loveable characters: No

Diverse cast of characters: No

Flaws of characters a main focus: Complicated

Content Warnings

scottishgremlin's review against another edition

2.0

challenging dark tense medium-paced

Plot or Character Driven: Plot

Strong character development: Complicated

Loveable characters: No

Diverse cast of characters: No

Flaws of characters a main focus: No

I really didn’t enjoy this book. I can appreciate its literary merits and contributions to the dystopian genre, but it was arduous to read and Orwell’s depiction of female characters was nauseating. It was also just kind of boring.

Content Warnings

birrebir's review against another edition

2.75

challenging dark slow-paced

Plot or Character Driven: Plot

Strong character development: No

Loveable characters: No

Diverse cast of characters: No

Flaws of characters a main focus: No

Content Warnings

simplyalexpls's review against another edition

4.0

challenging dark informative reflective tense medium-paced

Plot or Character Driven: A mix

Strong character development: Complicated

Loveable characters: No

Diverse cast of characters: No

Flaws of characters a main focus: Yes

Content Warnings

haiqanoor's review against another edition

DID NOT FINISH: 23%

it’s so boring, all the main character does is complain and be a misogynist -

the only mildly interesting thing he did was was write in that book and then he went straight back to having beef with some kids

- i don’t remember the guy’s name and orwell is a snitch so

Content Warnings

saraverboom's review against another edition

4.5

dark mysterious reflective tense medium-paced

Plot or Character Driven: A mix

Strong character development: Yes

Loveable characters: No

Diverse cast of characters: No

Flaws of characters a main focus: Yes

I finally picked up 1984 after postponing it for years, and I’m glad I did postpone it because the story seems more relevant to me now that it probably would have a couple of years ago.

In case anyone here doesn't know what the story is about (which I doubt, but just in case), here's a short summary.

Winston lives in a totalitarian state where love is illegal, history is being rewritten each day to fit the current narrative of the governing party, where thinking could literally be a criminal act, and where someone is always watching you. In this lonely society, Winston starts to doubt Big Brother (the government) and he starts taking risks while looking for companionship, a rebel organisation that might or might not exist, and basically for the meaning of life in a world where family and love don’t have a place.

Orwell’s mastery of world building is clear from the start. He eloquently describes what the everyday life looks like in his dystopian society, which makes it easy to get into the story quickly and envision everything that is described.

Another thing that became unmistakably clear, is that the protagonist (or, arguably, Orwell himself) hated women. Winston, the protagonist of the story, admits wanting to rape, hurt and murder a woman he ends up having sexual relations with and eventually develops some sort of warm feelings for. I’m no expert on George Orwell’s work or his personal life for that matter, so I can’t say whether these misogynist views are his own or just his character’s, but I was shocked at the way women are depicted as weak, immoral beings and mostly just as sexual objects. The protagonist shows his incel energy by disliking women just because he can’t seem to establish relationships with them easily. Winston proves to be an unreliable character as we follow his thoughts and actions throughout the story. He’s unlikable and not very wise, but his flaws lead to interesting developments.

Power is an important theme in this book. The Party exercises its power over the behaviour as well as the thoughts of its constituents. There is no freedom whatsoever in this society; not even freedom of thought. The Party controls everything, including Time. “Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.”

In my opinion, one of the most interesting aspects of this book, was the development of Newspeak; the official language in Oceania. As a language student I enjoyed reading the Principles of Newspeak in the appendix. The role of language in controlling people’s thoughts, is interesting to say the least. Newspeak is a language that is being altered everyday to eradicate certain vocabulary that might lead to rebellion. The idea here is that, by getting rid of certain words, you get rid of the possibility to think about these words too, which in turn means you can control people’s thoughts by controlling their language. Here’s a passage from the appendix that explains it better than I can:

“The purpose of Newspeak was not only to provide a medium of expression for the world-view and mental habits proper to the devotees of Ingsoc, but to make all other modes of thought impossible. It was intended that when Newspeak had been adopted once and for all and Oldspeak forgotten, a heretical thought -- that is, a thought diverging from the principles of Ingsoc -- should be literally unthinkable, at least so far as thought is dependent on words. Its vocabulary was so constructed as to give exact and often very subtle expression to every meaning that a Party member could properly wish to express, while excluding all other meanings and also the possibility of arriving at them by indirect methods. This was done partly by the invention of new words, but chiefly by eliminating undesirable words and by stripping such words as remained of unorthodox meanings, and so far as possible of all secondary meanings whatever.”

To me, this proves that there’s actual power in language and I find that both very intriguing and dangerous, but as long as the 2024 lexicon is limited to words such as ‘situationship’, ‘delulu’, and ‘rizz’, I’m not too worried.

I could go on and on about this book and I really think I’m in need of a book discussion, as this book covers so many interesting themes. It's not a secret that this book has aged very well, but it still amazes me that Orwell wrote this story about 75 years ago and yet it's still relevant today.

Looking at the world today (in 2024) it's hard not to compare current events to events happening in Orwell’s 1984. At the beginning of this review, I wrote that the book is more relevant to me today than it would have been a couple of years ago. Just look at the recent pandemic and all the conspiracy theories it has produced; had I not lived through these polarising times, I might not have found this story half as convincing as I find it now. I, having only ever known democracy, never having seen war, would not have believed this dystopian society as conceivable as I find it today, constantly seeing videos and images of Palestinians suffering under repressive regime in their occupied land. Truths are easily bended these days, so much so that victims are easily villainised and villains are to be applauded. I suppose this isn’t a new development, but since the coming of social media, it’s become easier to share truths and lies with the masses. As the influence of social media grows, the ability to think for oneself seems to be waning, which is exactly what Orwell tried to warn us about. The lesson we can learn from 1984 is to be cautious of governments attempting to gain too much control over their people, and to defend democracy at all costs. I suppose that this lesson can be applied to social media as well. For all its faults, I find 1984 to be a book everyone should read to learn this lesson.

Thank you for reading this somewhat messy and very lengthy review. Do let me know if you agree with me or if you have a different opinion. Like I said: I'm in need of a good discussion about this book!

Content Warnings

absolut_ly's review against another edition

2.5

dark emotional reflective sad tense slow-paced

Plot or Character Driven: A mix

Strong character development: No

Loveable characters: Complicated

Diverse cast of characters: No

Flaws of characters a main focus: Complicated

I have both simultaneously and impossibly completely read this book and wholeheartedly denounced its utter existence or potential to exist.

I think I’m disappointed. I had long expected this book to contain some more SCIENCE to its -fiction, yet mostly it dealt with drama and confusing or blurring the lines of reality. I’d wager this was more intended as a political protest and warning tragedy of the existing world governments in the 1940s than a prediction of what was to come. While a lot of the meta-content has, in fact, evolved to become true, it equally mispredicted some changes, lending to its true purpose of protest.

I can not recommend reading this book. Read a synopsis or something, or read Part 2 Chapter 09 and nothing else. I’m not even sure if Orwell was antisemitic by making the ‘villain’ be Jewish (

there’s no good closure on the purpose of Goldstein other than to be the scapegoat for the opposition to the Party, and nothing other than hateful rhetoric toward him or his ideology

) but he doesn’t do aftercare for any of the awful things; you just get a tragedy.

Content Warnings

More...