
I say, damn it, where are the beds? New books on Orwell - Phithagoras
https://www.lrb.co.uk/v39/n04/david-trotter/i-say-damn-it-where-are-the-beds
======
clydethefrog
This article seems like a lazy rewrite of an article about Orwell: Writing and
Democratic Socialism by Alex Woloch in the latest London Review of Books. See
the section after the *.

[https://www.lrb.co.uk/v39/n04/david-trotter/i-say-damn-it-
wh...](https://www.lrb.co.uk/v39/n04/david-trotter/i-say-damn-it-where-are-
the-beds)

It's a better read anyway.

~~~
vincvinc
Can I respectfully disagree with Dang's changing the featured link?

As someone who is not informed on Orwell, the previously featured article
actually helps me understand what it is trying to say. It also gives me
crucial basic information (e.g. Blair = Orwell) which is missing from the
London Review of Books article.

Reading both would be best of course, but I know which link I'm sending to
friends first.

~~~
clydethefrog
I agree with you as well. I never intended for this link to be the original
link. It was just intended for the audience of HN that is already a fan and
familiar with Orwell's work.

I couldn't reply to dang comment unfortunately to say that.

------
CalChris
His essays _Shooting An Elephant_ and _Politics and the English Language_ have
always stuck with me. We have the 4 volume collection in the family. It's at
an arm's distance right now.

I read _Animal Farm_ when I was 12 and _1984_ a few years later. And I've re-
read them a few times since. In college, I read _Down and Out_. Traveling
through Europe I read _Homage to Catalonia_.

Orwell is my favorite writer and _1984_ is my favorite book.

~~~
Finnucane
"Politics and the English Language" is unquestionably one of Orwell's most
important essays. Kind of amazing that this post overlooks it.

~~~
visakanv
I loved it so much that I once tried to do a 'modern update' of it, with
headers and bullet points and so on. It's meant to be a supplement to the
original essay, not a replacement: [http://visakanv.com/blog/politics-and-the-
english-language](http://visakanv.com/blog/politics-and-the-english-language)

~~~
Finnucane
I would be willing to bet money that Orwell would have hated bullet points.
Also, PowerPoint.

~~~
visakanv
I didn't remove anything that he said; I just presented his multiple lists of
examples in a easier-to-read format. The original essay probably was formatted
a particular way on the printed page, but it's turned into a tedious wall of
text in the orwell.ru version.

I have a link to the predecessor in opening; so you can open both copies in
separate tabs and compare them for yourself.

------
lb1lf
Say what you want about Orwell (Well, Blair, if you like), but he was a shrewd
observer of human nature.

1984 and Animal Farm are probably his best known works, but his 'Down and out
in Paris and London' describes being poor and how it affects both your body
and mind like no other account I've ever read (and I read quite a lot!)

I love his writing - and, before anyone suggest I have a rosy view of him
because of his politics, I am a (mild) libertarian of the Viennese mold...

------
reptation
The Road to Wigan Pier should be in this. Orwell lived with coal miners'
families in Northern Britain for months. I particularly was struck by his
descriptions of the way social-welfare policies were used to weaken family
structures of the poor.

~~~
pjc50
> social-welfare policies were used to weaken family structures of the poor

How on _earth_ do you get that message out of Orwell?

He argued in places that the various relief organisations were often
patronising and under-informed, but the "weaken family structures" is a
distinctly modern code phrase.

~~~
lacampbell
What's a "code phrase"?

~~~
djeikyb
see: shibboleth

~~~
lacampbell
I guess I was wanting the person that wrote it to explain what they meant,
rather than using weasel words.

------
wz1000
Homage to Catalonia deserves a mention here.

[https://libcom.org/files/Homage%20to%20Catalonia%20-%20Georg...](https://libcom.org/files/Homage%20to%20Catalonia%20-%20George%20Orwell.pdf)

~~~
dang
That was the book he talked about having sacrificed his art to write.

------
dang
Among everything else, Orwell is a master of English. This can be hard to see
because his mastery never calls attention to itself. His focus is always the
point.

~~~
CalChris
Strangely to me, _Politics and the English Language_ was never assigned in any
of the classes I took at Berkeley. _1984_ was by popular acclamation The Book.
But it seemed that PATEL was ranked too high for undergrads. It should've been
required English 1A reading.

------
iak8god
Would it have killed the author of this post to name the essays he's quoting?

"... good prose is like a windowpane." \- _Why I write_ , 1946

"Political language — and with variations this is true of all political
parties, from Conservatives to Anarchists — is designed to make lies sound
truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure
wind." \- _Politics and the English Language_ , 1946

Etc

------
vittore
I am so glad it is on front page. I LOVE his essays. Such a good read. And I
totally agree that they'll give you more than Animal Farm and 1984.

------
AlexCoventry
Orwell's book reviews are a treasure.

~~~
vittore
Benefit of Clergy is a marvelous gem!

------
conistonwater
Things like [http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2003/01/27/honest-
decent-w...](http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2003/01/27/honest-decent-wrong)
are worth reading too.

~~~
iak8god
This is such a strangely sparse comment. Can you say something about why you
recommend this article?

------
cgriswald
Orwell is great. This article is questionable.

> To the surprise of absolutely no one, George Orwell is everywhere these
> days. His seven-decade-old dystopian classic, 1984, recently made waves by
> topping a bunch of bestseller lists. Orwell’s earlier (and arguably greater)
> allegory, Animal Farm, is also getting its due. That both novels are
> suddenly on the radar of people who probably haven’t given Orwell a second
> thought in years is hardly surprising at a time when war refugees are
> painted as national security threats, white nationalists hold positions of
> power in the White House and an American president is openly involved in an
> abusive relationship with the English language.

It isn't surprising. What is surprising is to see anyone lay this at the feet
of Trump.

So here is what actually happened: In the wake of 9/11, Bush started
legitimizing a strong surveillance state (that to some degree has been with us
since WW II). With few exceptions, primarily from 'crazy libertarians' and
some liberals, both liberals and conservatives went along with it. Of course,
this didn't stop liberals from using it as justification to try to get
Republicans out of office later on.

Obama was elected. Since Obama was "their guy", liberals grew mostly silent on
the subject (although with _a lot_ more exceptions than before) and
conservatives suddenly changed their tune, at least in public: surveillance is
bad (but Snowden is still a traitor).

Those liberals who were cool with whatever Obama was doing believed in the
myth of "the right people". Meaning, governance isn't a question of political
power, sound policies, principled problem solving or anything along those
lines. It's just a question of having "the right people" in charge. So
whatever powers "the right people" say they need to do their job, since they
are "the right people" it must be true and we should give them those powers to
Get Things Done. (Note: there are conservative factions that believe this as
well.)

Now, those very same liberals are in a panic because (surprise, surprise)
Trump ( _i.e.,_ the wrong person) is in charge and has all those powers that
were previously given to "the right people". Of course, the problem _isn 't_
the granting of those powers. It's just that the wrong person was voted in by
an ignorant public.

So now, in a panic, largely induced by a media which finds itself incapable of
straight truth or depth, they flock to buy 1984 so they can 'legitimately'
talk and write about this book they've never previously read in order to make
tenuous comparisons to Trump's brand new presidency. And they, like
conservatives during the Obama years, will cry out against the very same
surveillance state that was no problem at all when their guy was in charge.

~~~
dang
Edit: ok, you don't like that Orwell article?—we got others. See
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13672556](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13672556).

> _Orwell is great. This article is questionable._

Probably true, but it's an excuse to talk about Orwell and most commenters
here are doing a great job of that. How about we keep it up and not take the
bait? That would be breaking new ground on the internet.

~~~
jdoliner
Personally, I think the parent comment has done the best job of talking about
Orwell and how he applies to our present situation of any in the thread.

I don't see anything particularly ground breaking about us all heaping praise
on Orwell, it seems like we all love his writing.

~~~
dang
What would be ground-breaking is bait resistance. A community that could
respond to the substantive parts of a story and resist getting sucked in by
the baity parts would be a new thing (where by 'new' I just mean I don't know
of one).

~~~
toss1941
The problem is the story's substance starts with poisoning the well by making
the accusation that the state of fear described in 1984 and Orwell's other
writing is due to Trump and the 'white nationalists' he has in his cabinet.
Then, it gives sparse details about the specific connections between Orwell's
writings and Trump, but because of the initial poison the reader is supposed
to infer meaning that simply doesn't exist. That's why I called it a
propaganda piece, because that's all it is. Orwell is fantastic, but Orwell in
my estimation would be rolling in his grave upon hearing that the biggest
hypocrites about 'government transparency' and 'fair free speech' in the world
are using him to attack their political opponents.

------
hereiam123
The irony of this piece is overwhelming.

~~~
skylan_q
Political correctness isn't language control... attacking it is!!

