Reality vs. Appearance according to Orwell and Machiavelli
These authors have different opinions on the way that ordinary people should be informed of what is going to happen in the everyday life of ordinary citizens. George Orwell's “Politics and the English Language” says that “English is in a bad way” (Orwell 28) because the ruling government wants their citizens to think that by writing and speaking in a deceptive way the ruling class can control what the ordinary people believe is happening to their lives. Niccolo Machiavelli's “The Prince” language says that not only does the ruling class need to control the subjects thinking they also need to mask or hide what is really going by making it hard for the people to understand what the ruling class is saying or doing. Have you ever tried to understand a new law that you are voting on? The language in the “new” law, that the government is trying to pass, is so complex and hard to understand that you have to read 4 or 5 pages of translation and rebuttals because they make the language sound complex so that you can't just read the “new” law and understand what it means to the public. This is done intentionally so that when voting, people will not understand what they are voting for or against. As citizens, the public has the right to know how the language of deception influences the government and media and how it effects today's society.
Orwell states that you need to come to the point quickly without writing words or phrases that imply one idea and mean something else. Using these words or phrases are meant to confuse or hide the true meanings of the statements. Machiavelli writes that confusing statements are what might be necessary to make a bad situation better and not to wo...
... middle of paper ...
...gainst. At the same time, hasn't that what has happened in the United States recently? There are so many laws being enacted that Americans don't have time to do things that they want to do. How far have we really come since Machiavelli's or Orwell's time? Living in this time, people still don't know what is going on in their own town or State and we still don't really know what the Government or the Media is saying.
Works Cited
(1) Machiavelli, Niccolo “The Prince” English 1A: Section 43199. N.P.:McGraw-Hill, 2013.(18-27). Print.
(2) Orwell, George “Politics and the English Language” English 1A: Section 43199. N.P.:McGraw-Hill, 2013.(28-37). Print.
(3) "Realism, Political." International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. Ed. William A. Darity, Jr. 2nd ed. Vol. 7. Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA, 2008. 96-97. Gale Virtual Reference Library. Web. 25 Mar. 2014.
...l Realism: Theory, History, Community. Ed. Lois Parkinson Zamora and Wendy B. Faris. Durham; N.C.: Duke UP, 1995. 249-263.
This essay is distinctly about how life experiences alter the way in which your writings travel. The ups and downs of life will determine the perspective you see of your life, in turn, determining how you feel or express yourself. Orwell states, “his subject matter will be determined by the age he lives in – at least this is true in tumultuous, revolutionary ages like our own” (265). This statement proves how writing develops with age and how through different time periods, has evolved. Orwell's essay focuses on the indirect wants.
Despite the warnings of Orwell through both his essay and dystopian novel, bad English is still used today, and could be argued to affect more English than it did during Orwell’s life. The consequences are also just as he predicted, those who control the language are able to wield control over the thoughts of others. The usage of poor quality English by media has he effect of making the recipients of news more detached from events and as a consequence, more self-focused. The clumsiness and foolishness imposed by bad English ultimately degrading thought, politics, culture, and society is what Orwell had foretold. This is the English tragedy that is disregarded, modern thoughts of “English” are not of language but of the English Queen.
Orwell’s classic, 1984, is a haunting, disturbing novel. Everything from constant surveillance to the mutability of the past adds to the creepy world Orwell created in his classic. Orwell’s writing style is incredibly descriptive, and paints a completely convincing picture of his dystopian setting. He does not use much figurative language, but he does rely on logical fallacies accepted as fact to shock and intrigue the reader. One
Living in a society where your government controls your every move exists in reality like Nazi Germany. Not only do they exist in reality but they also are portrayed through fiction novels like 1984. They both share similar dystopian characteristics including restriction of freedom, constant surveillance, and the use of
Many believe that Orwell came up with the political ideas surrounding his book Nineteen Eighty-Four. It was written in a time were politics were influenced by World War One and the decade after. In The Road to Wigan Pier, Orwell wrote, “The horrors of the Russian Revolution were still fresh in everyone’s minds.” I don’t think Orwell was necessarily giving us a detailed picture of how the future will look, or how political communication will be conducted. In D. J. Taylor’s 2004 biography of George Orwell he observed that, “the appeal – and the resonance – of Nineteen Eighty-Four to many of its original readers stemmed from the fact that it depicted a world that, by and large, they already knew.” This quote reinforces my idea that Orwell did not prophesize the future but forces us to think about how our past actions control our future. O’Briens statement "Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past." Is Orwell stating about what he and many others experienced as a teenager living through the horrors of the First World War. In my mind this only reinforces the notion that Nineteen Eighty-Four was written around the structure of the Russian Revolution feeding the predictions Orwell...
decades, what we call module verbs. These are verbs like can, must, will, shall, etc.…’”’ (Rosen & Arts 1). First, the language used by Orwell’s society recognized as Newspeak, which is just the English language but simpler by cutting out the complicated vocabulary and making up new words that sound childish, is just simply a rubbish or slang version of English. The way they cut out complicated words in English trying to make it simpler resembles how the government’s ruling is not complicated at the least and they try to avoid this factor by being simpler in their ways of carrying out orders or propagandas. By cutting out words from the English language instead of expanding, this resembles an imaginary barrier made of the toughest substances,
The prominent scholar of Political Science, Kenneth N. Waltz, founder of neorealism, has proposed controversial realist theories in his work. Publications such as "Man, the State, and War: A Theoretical Analysis", "Theory of International Politics” and “The Spread of Nuclear Weapons: A Debate,” demonstrate how Waltz's approach was motivated by the American military power. In acquaintance of this fact, the purpose of this paper is to critically analyze Waltz theoretical argument from the journal "Structural Realism after the Cold War". Firstly, this paper will indicate the author's thesis and the arguments supporting it. Secondly, limitations found in theoretical arguments will be illustrated and thirdly, synergies between the author's thesis and this analysis will be exposed.
Works Cited for: Orwell, George. 1984. The 'Standard' of the ' London: Penguin Books, 2008. Print. The.
Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2004. Orwell, George. A. A. 1984. The. New York, NY: Signet Classics, 1977. Print.
Magill, Frank N. Ed. “Nineteen Eighty-Four” Masterpieces of World Literature. New York NY: Harper Collins Publishers, 1989. 582-585. Orwell, George.
George Orwell’s intent in the novel 1984 is to warn society about the results of a controlling and manipulative government by employing mood, conflict, and imagery.
When examining the totalitarian government of 1984 by George Orwell, a direct connection can be drawn to the motives and ideals associated with Niccoló Machiavelli’s The Prince. Machiavelli’s support of the political necessity as a means to remain in power resonate with the government whose aim is to “extinguish once and for all the possibility of independent thought” as a way to ensure complete political orthodoxy within the country (193). Specifically, Machiavellian thought plays an important part in 1984 as its ideas on reputation, revolution, avoiding hatred, and the use of fear to control a populace are used by INGSOC in order to maintain complete control throughout the story. In the following paragraphs, the connections between these two works above will be elaborated on in an attempt to show the Machiavellian influence of the government in 1984.
Realism is one of the important perspectives on global politics, it is a notion about the conservative society and political philosophy (Heywood 2011: 54; Shimko 2013: 36). Besides, Gilpin (1996) claims that “realism…, it is not a scientific theory that is subject to the test of falsifiability, therefore, cannot be proved and disproved.” (Frankel 1996: xiii). The components of the realist approach to international relations will be discussed.
Realism is one of the oldest and most popular theories in International Relations. It offers a perspective about competition and power, and can be used to explain the actions between states. An example of realism is the U.S. reaction – or lack thereof – during the 1994 Rwandan genocide.