A review by zykx
1984 by George Orwell

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.
Expand filter menu Content Warnings