Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

orwell's 1984 and the early theories of wilhelm reich

Page 3 of 3 [ 37 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

Previous topic | Next topic

just-me
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Mar 2008
Age: 37
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,178

19 May 2008, 1:48 am

ouinon wrote:
In fact those are things that society can and does control, whereas I think that language is under noone's direct control, that it has a life of its own and just grows in certain ways in certain situations depending on the bodily experience of its hosts. :D

:study:


They do control language the direction that language goes. Ever notice how the media has been able influence people to talk like gangsters , ( yo , yo what's up with the d, o, g , my homey g! yo yo yo.)

I has only been that way since the music industry maid it like that.



peebo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Mar 2006
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,624
Location: scotland

19 May 2008, 8:40 am

Orwell wrote:
codarac wrote:
Jewish involvement in porn, by this argument, is the result of an atavistic hatred of Christian authority: they are trying to weaken the dominant culture in America by moral subversion. ...Pornography thus becomes a way of defiling Christian culture and, as it penetrates to the very heart of the American mainstream (and is no doubt consumed by those very same WASPs), its subversive character becomes more charged. <snip>

This seems equivalent to Winston's and Julia's affair in 1984. They did it mainly because it was subversive of established Party order.


exactly. i refer again to the quote from raoul vaniegem...

"People who talk about revolution and class struggle without referring explicitly to everyday life, without understanding what is subversive about love and what is positive in the refusal of constraints, such people have corpses in their mouth."


_________________
?Civil government, so far as it is instituted for the security of property, is in reality instituted for the defense of the rich against the poor, or of those who have some property against those who have none at all.?

Adam Smith


snake321
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Mar 2006
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,135

19 May 2008, 1:25 pm

just-me wrote:
ouinon wrote:
In fact those are things that society can and does control, whereas I think that language is under noone's direct control, that it has a life of its own and just grows in certain ways in certain situations depending on the bodily experience of its hosts. :D

:study:


They do control language the direction that language goes. Ever notice how the media has been able influence people to talk like gangsters , ( yo , yo what's up with the d, o, g , my homey g! yo yo yo.)

I has only been that way since the music industry maid it like that.


All our languages are slave languages.



matrix
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Oct 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 585
Location: between glitches

19 May 2008, 2:20 pm

I no longer understand these media conspiracy theories because I came to the realization that not all of our intellectual and imaginative achievements have been birthed or are being taken by a grandiose elite.

snake mentioned the Borg, which was a good socialist-but-anti-Marxist plot device that sci-fi authors use today, that our bravery in adversity defines our place in the cosmos.

Despite the various garbage todaylike top-40s and realityTV, we do have the option of changing our preferences. For example, I can get someone off the top-40 station and on to indie rock or something. We can use youtube against realityTV. As long as there is true variety, totalitarian agenda will have nothing to say.


_________________
You are not submitting the post
The post is submitting you


PLA
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 May 2007
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,929
Location: Sweden

24 May 2008, 4:46 am

Orwell wrote:
PLA wrote:
Orwell wrote:
Sexual repression was just one of many means the Party used to gain control. It certainly is not required in all fascist regimes. Have you ever read Brave New World by Aldous Huxley?


The society of Brave New World was not fascist as such. Well, yes - it was a bit . . .
But not in the same way that Oceania was fascist.
As Mustafa Mond said, the change came from below. It was - at least alledgedly - the will of the masses. An attempt at happiness, however twisted.

And subversive elements were simply expelled, and mostly left to their own devices.

Among 1984, Brave New World and Farenheit 451, I would much prefer the world of Aldous Huxley to the other two.

Well, people as a whole are happy in all three societies- that's really the point of most dystopian novels. Of the three you mentioned, I would probably survive best in 1984. Fahrenheit 451 wouldn't work for me, I think too much; and in BNW I would be too much like Bernard Marx. 1984 would be unpleasant, but I could remain quiet. Of all fictional dystopian societies, my personal favorite to live in would probably have been that of Player Piano (Vonnegut). And the change also came from below in Fahrenheit 451 as well as BNW.


That the change came from below in Farenheit 451 must have slipped my mind for a moment, sorry about that.
But still, governmental intervention was a lot more common in both Farenheit 451 and 1984.
Of course, that's because there was no need, thanks to conditioning, but still.
BNW is a lot less violent and loud.
Well, there are noisy areas, sure, but not quite as much.
I would crack in 1984. I cannot imagine that I would last more than 2-3 sessions of 2 minutes Hate.
Loud noise obliterates me.


_________________
I can make a statement true by placing it first in this signature.

"Everyone loves the dolphin. A bitter shark - emerging from it's cold depths - doesn't stand a chance." This is hyperbol.

"Run, Jump, Fall, Limp off, Try Harder."