In sharp contrast, Penelope Fitzgerald’s novel Offshore, explores the idea of rebellion by questioning whether an individual can find happiness when removed from orthodox social construct. Essentially rebelling against societal norms and expectations through the active choice of living outside of conventional standards, the central character, Nenna, elects to live on a houseboat with her children, with minimal connection to land and more refined society. Her future is as uneasy as the waters she chooses to live on, “and it was puzzling to account, really, for her awkward persistence about Grace” (Fitzgerald, 41). Her deliberate choice has consequences for her children as well, who mirror her rebellion by refusing to attend school, turning …show more content…
However, this argument suggests that the characters exist as social failures rather than acknowledging the development of each individual solely. Nenna is a fractured individual living on the fringe of the social construct, while Richard complicates our understanding of the formal characterization of rebellion. By refuting financial indulgence and class ambiguity, Richard complicates society’s response to him and his fellow barge dwellers. An example of this is found in the scene were Richard is attempting to secure an agent for Willis’ houseboat, Dreadnought. After enlisting the gentleman’s services, Pinkie states upon departure, “I can’t shake you, you’re living nowhere, you don’t belong to land or water” (67). This statement emphasizes the lack of social approval or understanding, and the extent that societal norms can marginalize individuals. Granting that not all of Fitzgerald’s characters challenge conventional placards, the tone of rebellion is emphasized through the appearance of the children. Using Martha as a unique illustration to this point, when expressing her innermost thoughts, she reveals a great interest in a distinct rebellion against her parents, because she feels it would be the triumph of an …show more content…
As made clear early in the text, Oceania has no laws, therefore nothing is illegal but nearly every act is fatal. The more uncertain a situation, organization or political power, the more power it is capable of holding over you. Thus, rebellion is an expected product of an oppressive regime. The constant suppression of any fraction will inevitably produce insurgence. The principle reason for the party’s existence was in rebellion against capitalism and independent thought, as the novel in its totality is a rebellion against structures of absolute power. Orwell’s final defiant method is allowing the reader to become engaged and eager to celebrate the successes of the oppressed, which is ultimately unsuccessful, revealing what such a totalitarian regime can produce. In comparison, Fitzgerald uses rebellion as an expression of people on the fringe of society, as a lesson in acceptance. Not so much as a will-full act in so much as a unique and unexpected behavior of the individual seeking one’s identity and place within society. Instead of acceptance, an endurance is
This itself alludes to America’s extreme response to communism during the Cold War era, under the influence of Senator Joe McCarthy. Similar to the paranoia that characterized the McCarthy era, Orwell’s dystopian society was expected to betray their friends, family and co-workers for the benefit of the state and themselves. This is made explicitly evident during Winston’s visit to the cafe, in which the telescreen sang; “Under the spreading chestnut tree/ I sold you and you sold me…”Foreshadowing Winston’s eventual betrayal of Maria in order to save himself, and his conformity to the party. Furthermore, the notion that “nothing was your own except the few cubic centimetres in your skull” becomes ironic as the novel develops in which the criminalisation of unorthodox ideologies leads to the punishment of “thoughtcrime”, and the eventual “vaporisation” of dissidents. This itself alludes to the ‘great purges’ that took place under the terror that characterized Joseph Stalin’s reign. Likewise, the inherent fear of eccentricity amongst the oppressed citizens of “Airstrip one” is highlighted by the nature of “facecrime” in which the presence of an improper expression or any suggestion of abnormality could be punished. Thus, through Orwell 's effective use of allusion and characterisation, contextual audiences are provided with a didactic warning regarding the nature of a totalitarian reign, in which a “hideous ecstasy of fear” influences society’s
People really think that the government is there to help them out from their enemies, they get happy with the increasing food rations announcement and really think the Big Brother exists. Therefore, the citizens of Oceania, especially the proles, prevent rebellion against the party because they admit that they have an ideal society.
...es of individuals can be used to explore a broader social wrong, in this case the injustice of a totalitarian government. Both authors use their protagonists to depict how a dictatorial state can destroy all sense of individuality, Orwell by presenting Winston in his fight against “The Party” and Niccol by depicting Vincent in his battle against society. Both authors also use individuals, who must isolate themselves in order to survive to expose how an unjust authoritative government can manufacture isolation. Orwell and Niccol also present conflicting views on the possibility of individual rebellion in an oppressive society, reflected by the success of Vincent and failure of Winston. In their prophetic dystopian texts both George Orwell and Andrew Niccol use the experiences of their protagonists to explore the broad social wrong of a totalitarian government.
Deception and a blatant contradiction of facts in the spirit of impunity form the foundation of the construct of modern dictatorship and draconian governance. Leaders with this attitude treat the public office and nation as personal property and deploy the state resources at their disposal for selfish use. Their behavior takes the form of frivolous “surveillances, monitoring, and other control structures founded on lies and ambiguities” (Dean and Orwell 23). The same scenario is exactly what happens at Oceania. The nation is governed by the party headed by the big brother (“Gordon State College” n.p.).
However, Fitzgerald does not write Gatsby as a bad person who embodies all that is wrong with western capitalism. Instead, Fitzgerald portrays Gatsby as a good man who was victim of the qualities ingrained in him by an imperfect ideological system. It is this distinction which makes Fitzgerald’s argument all the more potent, and his audience’s ability to mourn Gatsby as a tragic figure all the more important. Whereas Fitzgerald’s opinion of Gatsby may otherwise have been misconstrued as a negative one, the scene of Gatsby’s funeral clearly conveys the character of Gatsby as a tragic and sorrowful one. The character of Gatsby and Fitzgerald’s commentary on the logical fallacies of the American Dream are closely intertwined, which is why Fitzgerald goes to such great lengths to separate the two.
1. "no real right to touch her hand" lacked real resources, "he let her believe that he was a person from much the same strata as herself" (Fitzgerald 156)
Fitzgerald's book at first overwhelms the reader with poetic descriptions of human feelings, of landscapes, buildings and colors. Everything seems to have a symbolic meaning, but it seems to be so strong that no one really tries to look what's happening behind those beautiful words. If you dig deeper you will discover that hidden beneath those near-lyrics are blatancies, at best.
...m that was based more on wealth and possessions and less on hard work and achievement. The fact that he later rebelled against the material 1920s culture shows that he was in fact cautioning against this lifestyle rather than encouraging it.” This more than anything proves Fitzgerald is making a commentary on the corruption of the American Dream rather than simply the tale of wealthy lovers.
In the novel The Great Gatsby, Fitzgerald is criticizing American society of the 1920s. He uses the characters to demonstrate the power than men had over women during these times, as well as their mindless, self-indulgent actions, where consequence was only an afterthought. The attitude towards and the role of women is shown throughout the novel. Fitzgerald also shows how many people in America during this time were delusional and had meaningless existences.
Orwell shows the Party has taken strict measures in order to maintain the established status quo that suppresses the majority of Oceania. They have shaped and constructed history so that children grow up as servants to the party. Propaganda stating how rich and prosperous Oceania is the news of the day even though real conditions show buildings are dilapidated and resources are sparse.
Even further, Capote further proves Salinger’s point regarding rebellion as a way to find oneself. The two together show that those who feel restrained or an outsider of society tend to rebel in fatal or ruinous ways. Contrastingly, there are also many times when individuals choose not to follow the actions of others in order to protect themselves, essentially rebelling against the bad. Fitzgerald demonstrates this idea perfectly in his work. Nick chooses to not participate in the party scene that surrounds Gatsby. He does not want to get too involved with Gatsby’s parties, as he knows that they will ultimately be detrimental. Nick’s choice to not participate is seen as a form of rebellion (Fitzgerald, Pg 60). While these actions do not necessarily seem rebellious on the surface, they are equally as rebellious as more extreme measures. According to Fitzgerald, individuals who choose not to participate in actions that are seen as mainstream, or normal, are making a statement. They are going against what everyone else is doing, a major part of
state controls all aspects of people’s lives. Oceania’s entire population is under totalitarian rule and is
In The Great Gatsby, Fitzgerald employs the use of characters, themes, and symbolism to convey the idea of the American Dream and its corruption through the aspects of wealth, family, and status. In regards to wealth and success, Fitzgerald makes clear the growing corruption of the American Dream by using Gatsby himself as a symbol for the corrupted dream throughout the text. In addition, when portraying the family the characters in Great Gatsby are used to expose the corruption growing in the family system present in the novel. Finally, the American longing for status as a citizen is gravely overshot when Gatsby surrounds his life with walls of lies in order to fulfill his desires for an impure dream. F. Scot. Fitzgerald, through his use of symbols, characters, and theme, displays for the reader a tale that provides a commentary on the American dream and more importantly on its corruption.
...art of the whole society and have greater power through the amount of support for the party, while those who believe otherwise are less powerful as their support is much less and limited. Orwell shows how those who do not conform will end up being taken down by those with the power and there is not much anyone could do about that. Those who believed in change and tried to change the society only ended up meeting failure as majority rules, those with more power will overpower the weak and succeed.
In the novel, Gatsby, a wealthy socialite, pursues his dream, Daisy. In the process of pursuing Daisy, Gatsby betrays his morals and destroys himself. Through the eyes of the narrator, Nick, one sees the extent of the corruption Gatsby is willing to undertake in order to achieve his dream. Although Fitzgerald applauds the American Dream, he warns against the dangers of living in a world full of illusions and deceit; a trait common during the Roaring 20s. The language and plot devices Fitzgerald uses convey that lies and facades, which were common during the Guided Age, destroy one’s own character and morals.