a thesis about 1984

Home — Essay Samples — Literature — Books — 1984

Essays on 1984

Hook examples for "1984" essays, the dystopian warning hook.

Open your essay by discussing George Orwell's "1984" as a prophetic warning against totalitarianism and government surveillance. Explore how the novel's themes are eerily relevant in today's world.

The Orwellian Language Hook

Delve into the concept of Newspeak in "1984" and its parallels to modern language manipulation. Discuss how the novel's portrayal of controlled language reflects real-world instances of propaganda and censorship.

Big Brother is Watching Hook

Begin with a focus on surveillance and privacy concerns. Analyze the omnipresent surveillance in the novel and draw connections to contemporary debates over surveillance technologies, data privacy, and civil liberties.

The Power of Doublethink Hook

Explore the psychological manipulation in "1984" through the concept of doublethink. Discuss how individuals in the novel are coerced into accepting contradictory beliefs, and examine instances of cognitive dissonance in society today.

The Character of Winston Smith Hook

Introduce your readers to the protagonist, Winston Smith, and his journey of rebellion against the Party. Analyze his character development and the universal theme of resistance against oppressive regimes.

Technology and Control Hook

Discuss the role of technology in "1984" and its implications for control. Explore how advancements in surveillance technology, social media, and artificial intelligence resonate with the novel's themes of control and manipulation.

The Ministry of Truth Hook

Examine the Ministry of Truth in the novel, responsible for rewriting history. Compare this to the manipulation of information and historical revisionism in contemporary politics and media.

Media Manipulation and Fake News Hook

Draw parallels between the Party's manipulation of information in "1984" and the spread of misinformation and fake news in today's media landscape. Discuss the consequences of a distorted reality.

Relevance of Thoughtcrime Hook

Explore the concept of thoughtcrime and its impact on individual freedom in the novel. Discuss how society today grapples with issues related to freedom of thought, expression, and censorship.

Individuality in "1984" by George Orwell

Invasion of privacy in 1984, made-to-order essay as fast as you need it.

Each essay is customized to cater to your unique preferences

+ experts online

Effects of "Utopia-esque" Societies on People

George orwell’s representation of authority as illustrated in his book, 1984, orwell's use of literary devices to portray the theme of totalitarianism in 1984, the culture of fear in 1984, a novel by george orwell, let us write you an essay from scratch.

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

1984 by George Orwell: Literary Devices to Portray Government Controlling Its Citizens

The use of language to control people in 1984, dictatorship of the people: orwell's 1984 as an allegory for the early soviet union, searching for truth in 1984, get a personalized essay in under 3 hours.

Expert-written essays crafted with your exact needs in mind

A World Without Love: The Ramifications of an Affectionless Society in 1984

On double-think and newspeak: orwell's language, the theme of survival and selfishness in the handmaid's tale in 1984, government surveillance in 1984 by george orwell: bogus security, george orwell's 1984 as a historical allegory, exploitation of language in george orwell's 1984, how orwell's 1984 is relevant to today's audience, the relation of orwel’s 1984 to the uighur conflict in china, symbolism in 1984: the soviet union as representation of the fears people, parallels to today in 1984 by george orwell, the relationship between power and emotions in 1984, proletariat vs protagonist: winston smith's class conflict in 1984, a review of george orwell’s book, 1984, o'brien as a dehumanizing villain in 1984, family in 1984 and persepolis, the philosophy of determinism in 1984, orwell's use of rhetorical strategies in 1984, control the citizens in the orwell's novel 1984, dangers of totalitarianism as depicted in 1984, dystopian life in '1984' was a real-life in china.

8 June 1949, George Orwell

Novel; Dystopia, Political Fiction, Social Science Fiction Novel

Winston Smith, Julia, O'Brien, Aaronson, Jones, and Rutherford, Ampleforth, Charrington, Tom Parsons, Syme, Mrs. Parsons, Katharine Smith

Since Orwell has been a democratic socialist, he has modelled his book and motives after the Stalinist Russia

Power, Repressive Behaviors, Totalitarianism, Mass Surveillance, Human Behaviors

The novel has brought up the "Orwellian" term, which stands for "Big Brother" "Thoughtcrime" and many other terms that we know well. It has been the reflection of totalitarianism

1984 represents a dystopian writing that has followed the life of Winston Smith who belongs to the "Party",which stands for the total control, which is also known as the Big Brother. It controls every aspect of people's lives. Is it ever possible to go against the system or will it take even more control. It constantly follows the fear and oppression with the surveillance being the main part of 1984. There is Party’s official O’Brien who is following the resistance movement, which represents an alternative, which is the symbol of hope.

Before George Orwell wrote his famous book, he worked for the BBC as the propagandist during World War II. The novel has been named 1980, then 1982 before finally settling on its name. Orwell fought tuberculosis while writing the novel. He died seven months after 1984 was published. Orwell almost died during the boating trip while he was writing the novel. Orwell himself has been under government surveillance. It was because of his socialist opinions. The slogan that the book uses "2 + 2 = 5" originally came from Communist Russia and stood for the five-year plan that had to be achieved during only four years. Orwell also used various Japanese propaganda when writing his novel, precisely his "Thought Police" idea.

“Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.” “But if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought.” “Being in a minority, even in a minority of one, did not make you mad. There was truth and there was untruth, and if you clung to the truth even against the whole world, you were not mad.” “Confession is not betrayal. What you say or do doesn't matter; only feelings matter. If they could make me stop loving you-that would be the real betrayal.” “Power is in tearing human minds to pieces and putting them together again in new shapes of your own choosing.” "But you could not have pure love or pure lust nowadays. No emotion was pure, because everything was mixed up with fear and hatred."

The most important aspect of 1984 is Thought Police, which controls every thought. It has been featured in numerous books, plays, music pieces, poetry, and anything that has been created when one had to deal with Social Science and Politics. Another factor that represents culmination is thinking about overthrowing the system or trying to organize a resistance movement. It has numerous reflections of the post WW2 world. Although the novella is graphic and quite intense, it portrays dictatorship and is driven by fear through the lens of its characters.

This essay topic is often used when writing about “The Big Brother” or totalitarian regimes, which makes 1984 a flexible topic that can be taken as the foundation. Even if you have to write about the use of fear by the political regimes, knowing the facts about this novel will help you to provide an example.

1. Enteen, G. M. (1984). George Orwell And the Theory of Totalitarianism: A 1984 Retrospective. The Journal of General Education, 36(3), 206-215. (https://www.jstor.org/stable/27797000) 2. Hughes, I. (2021). 1984. Literary Cultures, 4(2). (https://journals.ntu.ac.uk/index.php/litc/article/view/340) 3. Patai, D. (1982). Gamesmanship and Androcentrism in Orwell's 1984. PMLA, 97(5), 856-870. (https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/pmla/article/abs/gamesmanship-and-androcentrism-in-orwells-1984/F1B026BE9D97EE0114E248AA733B189D) 4. Paden, R. (1984). Surveillance and Torture: Foucault and Orwell on the Methods of Discipline. Social Theory and Practice, 10(3), 261-271. (https://www.pdcnet.org/soctheorpract/content/soctheorpract_1984_0010_0003_0261_0272) 5. Tyner, J. A. (2004). Self and space, resistance and discipline: a Foucauldian reading of George Orwell's 1984. Social & Cultural Geography, 5(1), 129-149. (https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1464936032000137966) 6. Kellner, D. (1990). From 1984 to one-dimensional man: Critical reflections on Orwell and Marcuse. Current Perspectives in Social Theory, 10, 223-52. (https://pages.gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/kellner/essays/from1984toonedimensional.pdf) 7. Samuelson, P. (1984). Good legal writing: of Orwell and window panes. U. Pitt. L. Rev., 46, 149. (https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/upitt46&div=13&id=&page=) 8. Fadaee, E. (2011). Translation techniques of figures of speech: A case study of George Orwell's" 1984 and Animal Farm. Journal of English and Literature, 2(8), 174-181. (https://academicjournals.org/article/article1379427897_Fadaee.pdf) 9. Patai, D. (1984, January). Orwell's despair, Burdekin's hope: Gender and power in dystopia. In Women's Studies International Forum (Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 85-95). Pergamon. (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0277539584900621) 10. Cole, M. B. (2022). The Desperate Radicalism of Orwell’s 1984: Power, Socialism, and Utopia in Dystopian Times. Political Research Quarterly, 10659129221083286. (https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/10659129221083286)

Relevant topics

• The Outsiders
• Bartleby The Scrivener
• Frankenstein
• Between The World and Me
• Into The Wild
• Things Fall Apart
• Thank You Ma Am
• The Yellow Wallpaper
• The Things They Carried

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Bibliography

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

Doublethink Is Stronger Than Orwell Imagined

What 1984 means today

No novel of the past century has had more influence than George Orwell’s 1984 . The title, the adjectival form of the author’s last name, the vocabulary of the all-powerful Party that rules the superstate Oceania with the ideology of Ingsoc— doublethink , memory hole , unperson , thoughtcrime , Newspeak , Thought Police , Room 101 , Big Brother —they’ve all entered the English language as instantly recognizable signs of a nightmare future. It’s almost impossible to talk about propaganda, surveillance, authoritarian politics, or perversions of truth without dropping a reference to 1984. Throughout the Cold War, the novel found avid underground readers behind the Iron Curtain who wondered, How did he know?

It was also assigned reading for several generations of American high-school students. I first encountered 1984 in 10th-grade English class. Orwell’s novel was paired with Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World , whose hedonistic and pharmaceutical dystopia seemed more relevant to a California teenager in the 1970s than did the bleak sadism of Oceania. I was too young and historically ignorant to understand where 1984 came from and exactly what it was warning against. Neither the book nor its author stuck with me. In my 20s, I discovered Orwell’s essays and nonfiction books and reread them so many times that my copies started to disintegrate, but I didn’t go back to 1984 . Since high school, I’d lived through another decade of the 20th century, including the calendar year of the title, and I assumed I already “knew” the book. It was too familiar to revisit.

Read: Teaching ‘1984’ in 2016

So when I recently read the novel again, I wasn’t prepared for its power. You have to clear away what you think you know, all the terminology and iconography and cultural spin-offs, to grasp the original genius and lasting greatness of 1984 . It is both a profound political essay and a shocking, heartbreaking work of art. And in the Trump era , it’s a best seller .

The Ministry of Truth: The Biography of George Orwell’s 1984 , by the British music critic Dorian Lynskey, makes a rich and compelling case for the novel as the summation of Orwell’s entire body of work and a master key to understanding the modern world. The book was published in 1949, when Orwell was dying of tuberculosis , but Lynskey dates its biographical sources back more than a decade to Orwell’s months in Spain as a volunteer on the republican side of the country’s civil war. His introduction to totalitarianism came in Barcelona, when agents of the Soviet Union created an elaborate lie to discredit Trotskyists in the Spanish government as fascist spies.

Left-wing journalists readily accepted the fabrication, useful as it was to the cause of communism. Orwell didn’t, exposing the lie with eyewitness testimony in journalism that preceded his classic book Homage to Catalonia —and that made him a heretic on the left. He was stoical about the boredom and discomforts of trench warfare—he was shot in the neck and barely escaped Spain with his life—but he took the erasure of truth hard. It threatened his sense of what makes us sane, and life worth living. “History stopped in 1936,” he later told his friend Arthur Koestler, who knew exactly what Orwell meant. After Spain, just about everything he wrote and read led to the creation of his final masterpiece. “History stopped,” Lynskey writes, “and Nineteen Eighty-Four began.”

The biographical story of 1984 —the dying man’s race against time to finish his novel in a remote cottage on the Isle of Jura , off Scotland—will be familiar to many Orwell readers. One of Lynskey’s contributions is to destroy the notion that its terrifying vision can be attributed to, and in some way disregarded as, the death wish of a tuberculosis patient. In fact, terminal illness roused in Orwell a rage to live—he got remarried on his deathbed—just as the novel’s pessimism is relieved, until its last pages, by Winston Smith’s attachment to nature, antique objects, the smell of coffee, the sound of a proletarian woman singing, and above all his lover, Julia. 1984 is crushingly grim, but its clarity and rigor are stimulants to consciousness and resistance. According to Lynskey, “Nothing in Orwell’s life and work supports a diagnosis of despair.”

Lynskey traces the literary genesis of 1984 to the utopian fictions of the optimistic 19th century—Edward Bellamy’s Looking Backward (1888); the sci-fi novels of H. G. Wells, which Orwell read as a boy—and their dystopian successors in the 20th, including the Russian Yevgeny Zamyatin’s We (1924) and Huxley’s Brave New World (1932). The most interesting pages in The Ministry of Truth are Lynskey’s account of the novel’s afterlife. The struggle to claim 1984 began immediately upon publication, with a battle over its political meaning. Conservative American reviewers concluded that Orwell’s main target wasn’t just the Soviet Union but the left generally. Orwell, fading fast, waded in with a statement explaining that the novel was not an attack on any particular government but a satire of the totalitarian tendencies in Western society and intellectuals: “The moral to be drawn from this dangerous nightmare situation is a simple one: Don’t let it happen. It depends on you .” But every work of art escapes the artist’s control—the more popular and complex, the greater the misunderstandings.

Lynskey’s account of the reach of 1984 is revelatory. The novel has inspired movies, television shows, plays, a ballet, an opera, a David Bowie album , imitations, parodies, sequels, rebuttals, Lee Harvey Oswald, the Black Panther Party, and the John Birch Society. It has acquired something of the smothering ubiquity of Big Brother himself: 1984 is watching you. With the arrival of the year 1984, the cultural appropriations rose to a deafening level. That January an ad for the Apple Macintosh was watched by 96 million people during the Super Bowl and became a marketing legend. The Mac, represented by a female athlete, hurls a sledgehammer at a giant telescreen and explodes the shouting face of a man—oppressive technology—to the astonishment of a crowd of gray zombies. The message: “You’ll see why 1984 won’t be like ‘1984.’ ”

The argument recurs every decade or so: Orwell got it wrong. Things haven’t turned out that bad. The Soviet Union is history. Technology is liberating. But Orwell never intended his novel to be a prediction, only a warning. And it’s as a warning that 1984 keeps finding new relevance. The week of Donald Trump’s inauguration, when the president’s adviser Kellyanne Conway justified his false crowd estimate by using the phrase alternative facts , the novel returned to the best-seller lists. A theatrical adaptation was rushed to Broadway. The vocabulary of Newspeak went viral. An authoritarian president who stood the term fake news on its head, who once said, “What you’re seeing and what you’re reading is not what’s happening,” has given 1984 a whole new life.

What does the novel mean for us? Not Room 101 in the Ministry of Love, where Winston is interrogated and tortured until he loses everything he holds dear. We don’t live under anything like a totalitarian system. “By definition, a country in which you are free to read Nineteen Eighty-Four is not the country described in Nineteen Eighty-Four ,” Lynskey acknowledges. Instead, we pass our days under the nonstop surveillance of a telescreen that we bought at the Apple Store, carry with us everywhere, and tell everything to, without any coercion by the state. The Ministry of Truth is Facebook, Google, and cable news. We have met Big Brother and he is us.

Trump’s election brought a rush of cautionary books with titles like On Tyranny , Fascism: A Warning , and How Fascism Works . My local bookstore set up a totalitarian-themed table and placed the new books alongside 1984 . They pointed back to the 20th century—if it happened in Germany, it could happen here—and warned readers how easily democracies collapse. They were alarm bells against complacency and fatalism—“ the politics of inevitability ,” in the words of the historian Timothy Snyder, “a sense that the future is just more of the present, that the laws of progress are known, that there are no alternatives, and therefore nothing really to be done.” The warnings were justified, but their emphasis on the mechanisms of earlier dictatorships drew attention away from the heart of the malignancy—not the state, but the individual. The crucial issue was not that Trump might abolish democracy but that Americans had put him in a position to try. Unfreedom today is voluntary. It comes from the bottom up.

We are living with a new kind of regime that didn’t exist in Orwell’s time. It combines hard nationalism—the diversion of frustration and cynicism into xenophobia and hatred—with soft distraction and confusion: a blend of Orwell and Huxley, cruelty and entertainment. The state of mind that the Party enforces through terror in 1984 , where truth becomes so unstable that it ceases to exist, we now induce in ourselves. Totalitarian propaganda unifies control over all information, until reality is what the Party says it is—the goal of Newspeak is to impoverish language so that politically incorrect thoughts are no longer possible. Today the problem is too much information from too many sources, with a resulting plague of fragmentation and division—not excessive authority but its disappearance, which leaves ordinary people to work out the facts for themselves, at the mercy of their own prejudices and delusions.

During the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign, propagandists at a Russian troll farm used social media to disseminate a meme: “ ‘The People Will Believe What the Media Tells Them They Believe.’  — George Orwell.” But Orwell never said this. The moral authority of his name was stolen and turned into a lie toward that most Orwellian end: the destruction of belief in truth. The Russians needed partners in this effort and found them by the millions, especially among America’s non-elites. In 1984 , working-class people are called “proles,” and Winston believes they’re the only hope for the future. As Lynskey points out, Orwell didn’t foresee “that the common man and woman would embrace doublethink as enthusiastically as the intellectuals and, without the need for terror or torture, would choose to believe that two plus two was whatever they wanted it to be.”

We stagger under the daily load of doublethink pouring from Trump, his enablers in the Inner Party, his mouthpieces in the Ministry of Truth, and his fanatical supporters among the proles. Spotting doublethink in ourselves is much harder. “To see what is in front of one’s nose needs a constant struggle,” Orwell wrote . In front of my nose, in the world of enlightened and progressive people where I live and work, a different sort of doublethink has become pervasive. It’s not the claim that true is fake or that two plus two makes five. Progressive doublethink—which has grown worse in reaction to the right-wing kind—creates a more insidious unreality because it operates in the name of all that is good. Its key word is justice —a word no one should want to live without. But today the demand for justice forces you to accept contradictions that are the essence of doublethink.

For example, many on the left now share an unacknowledged but common assumption that a good work of art is made of good politics and that good politics is a matter of identity. The progressive view of a book or play depends on its political stance, and its stance—even its subject matter—is scrutinized in light of the group affiliation of the artist: Personal identity plus political position equals aesthetic value. This confusion of categories guides judgments all across the worlds of media, the arts, and education, from movie reviews to grant committees. Some people who register the assumption as doublethink might be privately troubled, but they don’t say so publicly. Then self-censorship turns into self-deception, until the recognition itself disappears—a lie you accept becomes a lie you forget. In this way, intelligent people do the work of eliminating their own unorthodoxy without the Thought Police.

Recommended Reading

A lost scottish island, george orwell, and the future of maps.

David Simon and E.L. Doctorow on 'the Potential for the Orwellian Nightmare'

Was Shakespeare a Woman?

Orthodoxy is also enforced by social pressure, nowhere more intensely than on Twitter, where the specter of being shamed or “canceled” produces conformity as much as the prospect of adding to your tribe of followers does. This pressure can be more powerful than a party or state, because it speaks in the name of the people and in the language of moral outrage, against which there is, in a way, no defense. Certain commissars with large followings patrol the precincts of social media and punish thought criminals, but most progressives assent without difficulty to the stifling consensus of the moment and the intolerance it breeds—not out of fear, but because they want to be counted on the side of justice.

This willing constriction of intellectual freedom will do lasting damage. It corrupts the ability to think clearly, and it undermines both culture and progress. Good art doesn’t come from wokeness, and social problems starved of debate can’t find real solutions. “Nothing is gained by teaching a parrot a new word,” Orwell wrote in 1946. “What is needed is the right to print what one believes to be true, without having to fear bullying or blackmail from any side.” Not much has changed since the 1940s. The will to power still passes through hatred on the right and virtue on the left.

1984 will always be an essential book, regardless of changes in ideologies, for its portrayal of one person struggling to hold on to what is real and valuable. “Sanity is not statistical,” Winston thinks one night as he slips off to sleep. Truth, it turns out, is the most fragile thing in the world. The central drama of politics is the one inside your skull.

This article appears in the July 2019 print edition with the headline “George Orwell’s Unheeded Warning.”

​When you buy a book using a link on this page, we receive a commission. Thank you for supporting The Atlantic.

What Orwell’s ‘1984’ tells us about today’s world, 70 years after it was published

Assistant Professor of Cinema and Media Studies, University of Washington

Disclosure statement

Stephen Groening does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

University of Washington provides funding as a member of The Conversation US.

View all partners

Seventy years ago, Eric Blair, writing under a pseudonym George Orwell, published “1984,” now generally considered a classic of dystopian fiction .

The novel tells the story of Winston Smith, a hapless middle-aged bureaucrat who lives in Oceania, where he is governed by constant surveillance. Even though there are no laws, there is a police force, the “Thought Police,” and the constant reminders, on posters, that “Big Brother Is Watching You.”

Smith works at the Ministry of Truth, and his job is to rewrite the reports in newspapers of the past to conform with the present reality. Smith lives in a constant state of uncertainty; he is not sure the year is in fact 1984.

Although the official account is that Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia, Smith is quite sure he remembers that just a few years ago they had been at war with Eastasia, who has now been proclaimed their constant and loyal ally . The society portrayed in “1984” is one in which social control is exercised through disinformation and surveillance.

As a scholar of television and screen culture , I argue that the techniques and technologies described in the novel are very much present in today’s world.

‘1984’ as history

One of the key technologies of surveillance in the novel is the “telescreen,” a device very much like our own television.

The telescreen displays a single channel of news, propaganda and wellness programming. It differs from our own television in two crucial respects: It is impossible to turn off and the screen also watches its viewers.

The telescreen is television and surveillance camera in one. In the novel, the character Smith is never sure if he is being actively monitored through the telescreen.

Orwell’s telescreen was based in the technologies of television pioneered prior to World War II and could hardly be seen as science fiction. In the 1930s Germany had a working videophone system in place , and television programs were already being broadcast in parts of the United States, Great Britain and France .

Past, present and future

The dominant reading of “1984” has been that it was a dire prediction of what could be. In the words of Italian essayist Umberto Eco, “at least three-quarters of what Orwell narrates is not negative utopia, but history .”

Additionally, scholars have also remarked how clearly “1984” describes the present.

In 1949, when the novel was written, Americans watched on average four and a half hours of television a day; in 2009, almost twice that . In 2017, television watching was slightly down, to eight hours, more time than we spent asleep .

In the U.S. the information transmitted over television screens came to constitute a dominant portion of people’s social and psychological lives.

‘1984’ as present day

In the year 1984, however, there was much self-congratulatory coverage in the U.S. that the dystopia of the novel had not been realized. But media studies scholar Mark Miller argued how the famous slogan from the book, “Big Brother Is Watching You” had been turned to “Big Brother is you, watching” television .

Miller argued that television in the United States teaches a different kind of conformity than that portrayed in the novel. In the novel, the telescreen is used to produce conformity to the Party. In Miller’s argument, television produces conformity to a system of rapacious consumption – through advertising as well as a focus on the rich and famous. It also promotes endless productivity, through messages regarding the meaning of success and the virtues of hard work .

Many viewers conform by measuring themselves against what they see on television, such as dress, relationships and conduct. In Miller’s words, television has “set the standard of habitual self-scrutiny.”

The kind of paranoid worry possessed by Smith in the novel – that any false move or false thought will bring the thought police – instead manifests in television viewers that Miller describes as an “inert watchfulness.” In other words, viewers watch themselves to make sure they conform to those others they see on the screen.

This inert watchfulness can exist because television allows viewers to watch strangers without being seen. Scholar Joshua Meyrowitz has shown that the kinds of programming which dominate U.S television – news, sitcoms, dramas – have normalized looking into the private lives of others .

Controlling behavior

Alongside the steady rise of “reality TV,” beginning in the ‘60s with “Candid Camera,” “An American Family,” “Real People,” “Cops” and “The Real World,” television has also contributed to the acceptance of a kind of video surveillance.

For example, it might seem just clever marketing that one of the longest-running and most popular reality television shows in the world is entitled “ Big Brother .” The show’s nod to the novel invokes the kind of benevolent surveillance that “Big Brother” was meant to signify: “We are watching you and we will take care of you.”

But Big Brother, as a reality show, is also an experiment in controlling and modifying behavior. By asking participants to put their private lives on display, shows such as “Big Brother” encourage self-scrutiny and behaving according to perceived social norms or roles that challenge those perceived norms .

The stress of performing 24/7 on “Big Brother” has led the show to employ a team of psychologists .

Television scholar Anna McCarthy and others have shown that the origins of reality television can be traced back to social psychology and behavioral experiments in the aftermath of World War II, which were designed to better control people.

Yale University psychologist Stanley Milgram , for example, was influenced by “Candid Camera.”

In the “Candid Camera” show, cameras were concealed in places where they could film people in unusual situations. Milgram was fascinated with “Candid Camera,” and he used a similar model for his experiments – his participants were not aware that they were being watched or that it was part of an experiment .

Like many others in the aftermath of World War II, Milgram was interested in what could compel large numbers of people to “follow orders” and participate in genocidal acts. His “obedience experiments” found that a high proportion of participants obeyed instructions from an established authority figure to harm another person, even if reluctantly .

While contemporary reality TV shows do not order participants to directly harm each other, they are often set up as a small-scale social experiment that often involves intense competition or even cruelty.

Surveillance in daily life

And, just like in the novel, ubiquitous video surveillance is already here.

Closed-circuit television exist in virtually every area of American life, from transportation hubs and networks , to schools , supermarkets , hospitals and public sidewalks , not to mention law enforcement officers and their vehicles .

Surveillance footage from these cameras is repurposed as the raw material of television, mostly in the news but also in shows like “America’s Most Wanted,” “Right This Minute” and others. Many viewers unquestioningly accept this practice as legitimate .

The friendly face of surveillance

Reality television is the friendly face of surveillance. It helps viewers think that surveillance happens only to those who choose it or to those who are criminals. In fact, it is part of a culture of widespread television use, which has brought about what Norwegian criminologist Thomas Mathiesen called the “viewer society” – in which the many watch the few.

For Mathiesen, the viewer society is merely the other side of the surveillance society – described so aptly in Orwell’s novel – where a few watch the many.

[ Expertise in your inbox. Sign up for The Conversation’s newsletter and get a digest of academic takes on today’s news, every day. ]

• Surveillance
• George Orwell
• Big Brother
• Scientific experiments

Research Fellow High Impact Weather Climate Change

Director, Defence and Security

Opportunities with the new CIEHF

School of Social Sciences – Public Policy and International Relations opportunities

Deputy Editor - Technology

by George Orwell

1984 themes, totalitarianism.

In writing 1984 , Orwell's main goal was to warn of the serious danger totalitarianism poses to society. He goes to great lengths to demonstrate the terrifying degree of power and control a totalitarian regime can acquire and maintain. In such regimes, notions of personal rights and freedoms and individual thought are pulverized under the all-powerful hand of the government. Orwell was a Socialist and believed strongly in the potential for rebellion to advance society, yet too often he witnessed such rebellions go wrong and develop into totalitarian rule. Specifically, Orwell saw such developments during his time in Spain and in Russia, where he witnessed the rise of communism and the accompanying destruction of civil liberties, honest government, and economic strength.

During a time when much of the Western world was lauding communism as a step towards human progress in the development of equality in government, Orwell clearly and definitively spoke out against the practice. In 1984 , Orwell presents a dystopia, or in other words, the perfect totalitarian state. In composing this novel, Orwell gave the world a glimpse of what the embrace of communism might lead to if allowed to proceed unchecked. The Party is unflawed in its universal control over society, as evidenced by its ability to break even an independent thinker such as Winston, and has mastered every aspect of psychological control, largely through utilizing technological developments (allowing for inventions such as the telescreen) to their advantage. In ending the novel with Winston defeated in every sense of the term, Orwell clearly suggests that there is no hope for quelling the expansion or growth of such a perfectly established regime. And, more importantly, Orwell warns that at the time, this outcome was within the realm of possibility as long as the world supported and embraced communism.

A major factor in the Party's rule over Oceania lies in its extremely well organized and effective propaganda machine. The Ministry of Truth, which is ironically where Winston works, is responsible for disseminating all Party publications and information. All figures and facts come from the Ministry of Truth, and all are dictated by the Party. In other words, the Party chooses exactly what to tell the public, regardless of what is accurate. The effectiveness of this propaganda machine, which constantly corrects old material to reflect the Party's current position on any subject ranging from chocolate rations to the loyalty of a specific individual, allows the Party to completely dominate the range of information disseminated to the public. Therefore, as O'Brien notes, the machine determines what constitutes reality.

In addition to the massive amounts of doctored information the Party disseminates to the public, there are also basic forms of propaganda, such as the Two Minutes Hate, Hate Week, posters of Big Brother , and required daily participation in the Physical Jerks. The Party uses literally every waking opportunity to instill its ideals into its citizens, and is strikingly successful in achieving its goal of total loyalty. In 1984 we see the vigor and loyalty such propaganda inspires in the citizens. The citizens of Oceania are filled with hatred for the country's stated enemies, but this hatred is easily re-directed if the enemy happens to change. This efficiency is quite disturbing. Orwell's presentation of the power of propaganda significantly supports his warning against totalitarianism. If propaganda rules all information, it is impossible to have any grasp on reality. The world is as the Party defines it.

Love/Sexuality

The Party works to quell all physical sensations of love, and depersonalizes sex to the point where it is referred to as a "duty to the Party" (for the purposes of procreation). Some Party organizations even advocate complete abstinence and procreation only through artificial insemination. Winston suffers the Party's removal of personal fulfillment or enjoyment in relationships in his failed marriage with Katharine . Later, when he finds Julia , Winston relishes the freedom of being able to love someone in a physical and emotional way. So much of Winston's seeming rebellion turns out to be guided and influenced by the Party ( Mr. Charrington , O'Brien, the Brotherhood), but his relationship with Julia is not. Winston is only able to rebel against the Party through his affair with Julia, even though this love is destroyed in the end.

Orwell's discussion of love is not only relegated to romantic love. Through Winston's memories of his mother and the contrast between how she cared for him and his sister and the average Party family is striking. Winston's mother deeply loved her children and did all she could to protect them during the aftermath of the Revolution and the Party's rise to power. In Winston's time, the Party has removed such interfamilial loyalty, demanding that all love and loyalty be reserved for Big Brother and the Party. In this way, the bonds between parents and children are broken. Even worse, children commonly report their parents to the Thought Police, placing the Party above the lives of their mother and father. The Party's eventual goal is to destroy the family unit entirely and have all children raised in Party facilities. The Party has no room for love, unless that love is directed with full force at Big Brother and Oceania.

Independence/Identity

Through its effective psychological manipulation tactics, the Party destroys all sense of independence and individuality. Everyone wears the same clothes, eats the same food, and lives in the same grungy apartments. Life is uniform and orderly. No one can stand out, and no one can be unique. To have an independent thought borders on the criminal. For this reason, writing such as Winston does in his diary has been outlawed. People are only permitted to think what the Party tells them to think, which leads to what Syme refers to as "duckspeak." Independent thought can be dangerous, as it might lead to rebellion.

This theme comes to a head during Winston's torture, when Winston argues that he is a man, and because he is a man O'Brien cannot tell him what he thinks. O'Brien counters that if Winston is a man, he is the last man on earth. Moreover, O'Brien suggests that this independence is evidence of insanity. O'Brien's view represents the purity of a totalitarian regime, in that independent thought must be destroyed to promote the needs and goals of the Party. Winston and Julia's downfall occurs because they believe they are special. Their arrest and torture, however, breaks this spirit. Once again, through this ultimate loss of individual thought, we witness Orwell's warning against embracing any version of totalitarian rule.

Songs appear throughout the novel, most often when Winston is reflecting on the state of the world. Music appears to inspire Winston and allows him to see beauty and simplicity in an otherwise violent, ugly, and frightening world. He sees a powerful sense of tragedy in "Under the spreading Chestnut Tree," hope for a brighter future in the beautiful thrush song, respect for the true, untouchable past in the "St. Clement's Dane" rhyme, and freedom and hope in the passion with which the prole woman sings while hanging her laundry. Below, listed in chronological order are the musical events that occur in the novel.

Winston describes sitting in the Chestnut Tree Cafe, observing the clearly beaten, defeated, and tragically sad Jones, Aaronson and Rutherford , while the song "Under the spreading Chestnut Tree, I sold you and you sold me" plays over the telescreen. The song seems to reflect the broken spirits of these three men, who were once Inner Party members and now have lost everything.

Mr. Charrington teaches Winston the rhyme that begins "Oranges and lemons say the bells of St. Clement's," which is a vestige of the past. Throughout the novel, Winston holds on to this rhyme and tries to discover its entirety. He succeeds, with the help of Julia, who remembers a few more lines than Mr. Charrington, and O'Brien, who finishes the poem for Winston.

Julia and Winston are in the Golden Country, beginning their affair. As they stand next to each other surveying the landscape, a small thrush begins to sing next to them. Winston is taken in by the bird's boundless freedom and wonders what makes him sing so beautifully. To Winston, the bird's song represents all he longs for in life. It is the exact opposite of the Party.

Winston hears the prole woman in the yard behind Mr. Charrington's house sing while she works. She belts out the tune without any hesitation, throwing herself into the simple music with a passion Winston reveres.

Winston tells Julia of the poem Mr. Charrington taught him, and she adds two verses. Her grandfather taught her the rhyme when she was young, and Winston is elated to learn the next few lines of the piece. This cooperation reveals a strong bond between Winston and Julia.

Winston discusses the Hate Song the Party created solely for the Hate Week celebration. This is the only time we hear of a song created purely for negative means. Winston notes that the Hate Song is not as popular among the proles as some of the more simple tunes the Ministry of Truth has produced for them.

O'Brien completes Mr. Charrington's rhyme, and Winston is immensely satisfied to finally know the complete piece. He feels that gaining the last puzzle piece from O'Brien symbolically represents their bond in rebelling against the Party and pursuing a future steeped in freedom.

Winston again hears the prole woman singing passionately while doing her wash and reflects on the primitivism in song. Winston thinks about the millions of people around the world, just like this woman, who find such pleasure, power and freedom in music and are able to embrace it in their lives. He is arrested immediately after this brief scene, which fulfills the last line of the "St. Clement's Dane" song, "Here comes a chopper to chop off your head!"

Winston sits in the Chestnut Tree Cafe, just as Jones, Aaronson and Rutherford once did. He hears the same song he heard when watching those three men, "Under the spreading Chestnut Tree, I sold you and you sold me." Here, the song speaks to the destruction of Winston's independence, and his newly discovered love for Big Brother.

The Party is fueled by loyalty, and thus demands that its citizens support any and all actions it takes in pursuing a greater Oceania. For the Party, loyalty means accepting without question or hesitation. Ironically, when Winston pledges his loyalty to the Brotherhood, he also agrees to accept the goals and requirements of the Brotherhood without question or hesitation. Winston agrees to do anything the Brotherhood requires, even if that means murdering innocents. However, Winston is also loyal to Julia, and refuses to be separated from her forever. This split loyalty is what separates Winston from the other Party members. Party members are loyal to the Party, Big Brother, and Oceania alone. Personal relationships are of no importance.

While in the Ministry of Love, O'Brien notes this weakness in Winston's mind and effectively removes it. Through painful physical torture, O'Brien first teaches Winston that the Party's perspective is the accurate perspective. Next, by threatening him with carnivorous rats, O'Brien breaks Winston's loyalty to Julia. In the last scene of the novel, Winston finally comes to love Big Brother, and his transition from split loyalties to a greater single loyalty to the Party is complete.

Poverty vs. Wealth

Oceanian society presents a clear dichotomy in living conditions. The small Inner Party lives luxuriously, with servants and lush, well-furnished apartments. Party members, on the other hand, live in run-down single-room apartments with no amenities and low-quality, tasteless food. The proles live in absolute poverty. The chasm between poverty and wealth in the novel is striking, and is most noticeable during Winston's forays into prole society. The buildings the proles live in are decaying, and the city of London is filled with bombed-out ruins. While the Inner Party comforts itself with luxury, the citizens of Oceania suffer, getting by with the bare minimum in a dying city.

Orwell presents this dichotomy to demonstrate how totalitarian societies promote the wealth of the ruling regime while decreasing the quality of life for all other members of society. Such governments often tout their hopes for establishing an equal society when in reality the separation between their living conditions and those of the citizens is vast. Winston looks out on the city of London and sees a dying world. Meanwhile, O'Brien looks out on the city of London and sees a society trapped in a single moment in time, defined and controlled by the Party.

As previously noted, technology is an extremely important tool that the Party uses to maintain control over its citizens. Without telescreens, the Thought Police would not be nearly as effective, and propaganda would not be so widespread. The constant supervision of the telescreen effectively imprisons citizens of Oceania in their daily lives: they are always under observation.

Ironically, other areas of technological development are strikingly stagnant. For example, the printing machines in the Ministry of Truth are still quite basic, and each superstate continues to build the same bombs that were used decades before. Scientific progress has halted, except where it serves the Party's goals (such as in artificial insemination or new methods for psychological manipulation). In the world of Oceania there is no such as thing as progress for the sake of progress; there is only power for the sake of power. When technological developments serve this power, they are encouraged. When they do not, they are stopped.

Newspeak plays an extremely important role in Oceanian society and in the Party's control over its population. As Syme says, Newspeak reduces and limits the number of words in the English language, and removes words used to describe rebellion or independence (with the ultimate goal being to remove citizens' ability to think anti-Party thoughts). Interestingly, the Party works to form a language around itself rather than naturally accepting and assuming the language of the people that make up the country. In this way, language is used as yet another mechanism of mind control.

Removing a nation's original language serves to reduce the importance of a nation's past. Languages develop over centuries, and are deeply intertwined with culture and history. Redefining and forcing a language on a population, as was often done in the postcolonial era, denies that society its individuality. The Party meets this goal with great efficiency.

1984 Questions and Answers

The Question and Answer section for 1984 is a great resource to ask questions, find answers, and discuss the novel.

Describe O’Briens apartment and lifestyle. How do they differ from Winston’s?

From the text:

It was only on very rare occasions that one saw inside the dwelling-places of the Inner Party, or even penetrated into the quarter of the town where they lived. The whole atmosphere of the huge block of flats, the richness and...

What was the result of Washington exam

Sorry, I'm not sure what you are asking here.

how is one put into the inner or outer party in the book 1984

The Outer Party is a huge government bureaucracy. They hold positions of trust but are largely responsible for keeping the totalitarian structure of Big Brother functional. The Outer Party numbers around 18 to 19 percent of the population and the...

Study Guide for 1984

1984 study guide contains a biography of George Orwell, literature essays, quiz questions, major themes, characters, and a full summary and analysis.

• 1984 Summary
• Character List

Essays for 1984

1984 essays are academic essays for citation. These papers were written primarily by students and provide critical analysis of 1984 by George Orwell.

• The Reflection of George Orwell
• Totalitarian Collectivism in 1984, or, Big Brother Loves You
• Sex as Rebellion
• Class Ties: The Dealings of Human Nature Depicted through Social Classes in 1984
• 1984: The Ultimate Parody of the Utopian World

Lesson Plan for 1984

• About the Author
• Study Objectives
• Common Core Standards
• Introduction to 1984
• Relationship to Other Books
• Bringing in Technology
• Notes to the Teacher
• Related Links
• 1984 Bibliography

Wikipedia Entries for 1984

• Introduction
• Writing and publication

AFS Programs

Mastering the Art of Crafting a Powerful 1984 Thesis Statement

In the world of literary analysis, one novel has remained a towering figure for over 70 years: George Orwell’s “1984”. Its chilling portrayal of a dystopian society controlled by a powerful party leaves readers spellbound and sparks endless discussions and studies. However, crafting a strong thesis statement about this masterpiece is no easy task. But fear not, for in this article, we will show you how to create a rock-solid thesis statement that will captivate your readers and set the tone for your entire essay.

Before we dive into the finer details of creating a magnificent thesis statement, let’s step back for a moment and analyze the key themes and ideas that make “1984” such a thought-provoking piece of literature. At its core, the novel is about the controlling power of language and the manipulation of history by the ruling party. As readers, we are forced to confront our own thoughts and confront the terrifying possibility of losing our freedom and identity.

So, how can we craft a thesis statement that captures the essence of this powerful novel? First, it is important to have a clear understanding of the main character, Winston Smith, and his struggle against the oppressive party. Your thesis statement should be able to effectively convey the theme of rebellion and the consequences of individual thoughts in a society determined to suppress them.

To help you on this journey, let’s explore some examples of strong thesis statements about “1984”. Remember, a strong thesis statement gives direction to your essay and leaves no room for weak or mediocre analysis. Here are two examples to get you started:

• “In George Orwell’s ‘1984’, the character of Winston Smith serves as a symbol of resistance against the party’s oppressive regime, highlighting the power of individual thought in a society ruled by fear and manipulation.”
• “Through the character of O’Brien, Orwell explores the sinister motivations behind the party’s control and the dangers of unchecked power in ‘1984’, ultimately illustrating the futility of rebellion against an all-powerful entity.”

As you can see, these examples not only focus on the central theme and character of the novel but also present a clear argument that can be explored and supported throughout your essay. They provide a solid foundation for a captivating and well-structured analysis, keeping your readers engaged from start to finish.

Need help with your thesis statement or writing in general? Kibin is here to lend a helping hand. Our team of experienced editors provides expert advice and guidance to students just like you. Don’t let weak writing spoil your essay; let Kibin help you take it to the next level. Tags: 1984, analysis, essays, George Orwell, literary analysis, thesis statements.

A Sample Weak Thesis

“In George Orwell’s 1984, the party’s use of propaganda is scary-good.”

This weak thesis statement lacks clarity and specificity. It does not provide a clear focus or direction for the essay, making it difficult for the reader to understand what the author intends to analyze.

Another issue with this weak thesis statement is its lack of depth. The statement simply states that the party’s use of propaganda is scary-good without further expanding on this claim. It does not provide any analysis or identify the specific qualities that make the propaganda in 1984 powerful.

In order to create a stronger and more powerful thesis statement, it is important to analyze the language, character development, and historical context of 1984. A rock-solid thesis statement will be able to withstand thorough analysis and provide a clearer and more insightful focus for the essay.

Understanding the Importance of a Strong Thesis Statement

One example of a strong thesis statement for a 1984 essay might be: “By analyzing the character of O’Brien and the Party’s control of language, this essay will demonstrate how the Party seeks to control and manipulate people’s thoughts.” This thesis statement not only identifies the key elements to be discussed in the essay (O’Brien and language control), but also provides a clear focus on the theme of power and control in the novel.

To craft a stronger thesis statement, you may want to consider approaching it from a different angle or focus on a different aspect of the novel. For instance, you could analyze the role of propaganda in controlling the masses or examine the importance of history and its manipulation by the Party.

In order to create an outstanding thesis statement, it’s important to have a solid understanding of the novel and its themes. Take the time to do some close reading and thoughtfully analyze the characters, language, and literary devices used in 1984. This will help you identify the finer details and subtleties that can make your thesis statement even stronger.

Don’t be afraid to check out some sample essays or seek help from resources like Kibin. They’re a great way to get a better sense of what a powerful thesis statement looks like and how it can be supported throughout your essay.

Analyzing the Elements of a Powerful Thesis Statement

Identifying the theme, character, and irony.

In order to create a powerful thesis statement for your analysis of 1984, it is important to first identify the key elements of the novel. This includes understanding the theme of the novel, the development of the main character, as well as the use of irony throughout the story. By focusing on these elements, you can expand your analysis and create a stronger thesis statement.

Analysis of Propaganda and Control

One of the most important aspects of 1984 is its exploration of propaganda and the party’s control over its citizens. A powerful thesis statement will delve into the finer details of how the party uses propaganda to manipulate its citizens and maintain control. By analyzing examples from the novel, you can create a thesis statement that goes beyond a simple observation and provides a deeper understanding of the themes and messages of the book.

The Role of O’Brien and the Father in 1984

Another way to create a powerful thesis statement is to focus on the role of specific characters in the novel, such as O’Brien and the father. By examining their actions and motivations, you can analyze how they contribute to the overall themes and messages of the book. This gives your thesis statement more depth and makes it more engaging for your reader.

Check out this sample thesis statement for a better idea of what a powerful thesis statement looks like:

“In George Orwell’s 1984, the party’s use of propaganda and control tactics, as exemplified through the character of O’Brien, reveals the damning consequences of a totalitarian regime on individual freedom and the human spirit.”

By analyzing the different elements of 1984 and crafting a rock-solid thesis statement, you will be well on your way to writing an outstanding analysis essay that gives justice to Orwell’s magnificent work.

So don’t forget to analyze the history, themes, and literary qualities of the novel, and above all, make sure your thesis statement is strong and powerful. With the help of this guide, you’ll be able to create a thesis statement that is both scary-good and propels your essay to new heights.

Don’t be overwhelmed by the task of writing a powerful thesis statement. With the right approach and a bit of practice, you can master the art of crafting strong and impactful statements. So go out there and create something outstanding!

For more examples and tips on writing a powerful thesis statement, check out the Kibin blog.

Now that you know what makes a powerful thesis statement, 1, 2, 3, get out there and start crafting your own! Good luck!

Common Mistakes to Avoid in Crafting a 1984 Thesis Statement

1. losing focus on the party’s controlling language.

One common mistake is losing focus on the Party’s controlling language. The way the Party uses language to manipulate and control the thoughts of its citizens is a central theme in 1984. When crafting your thesis statement, be sure to address how the Party’s manipulation of language shapes the world of the novel.

2. Crafting Mediocre Statements without Analysis

Another mistake is crafting mediocre thesis statements without thorough analysis. A powerful thesis statement should go beyond stating the obvious. Instead, it should offer a unique perspective or interpretation of the novel. Be sure to analyze the text and provide evidence to support your claims.

For example, instead of a statement like “1984 is about the dangers of totalitarianism,” try something more specific and engaging like “In 1984, Orwell uses the character of O’Brien to symbolize the Party’s absolute control and the loss of individual freedom.”

3. Ignoring the Father-Son Relationship as a Key Theme

Many writers overlook the importance of the father-son relationship in 1984. The strained relationship between Winston and his own father serves as a symbol for the Party’s ability to destroy familial bonds and control the emotions of its citizens. Don’t miss the opportunity to explore this theme in your thesis statement.

For example, you could craft a thesis statement like “In 1984, the Party’s control over the father-son relationship reveals the devastating effects of totalitarianism on familial connections and personal identity.”

4. Failing to Craft an Outline before Writing

One mistake that can lead to a weak thesis statement is failing to craft an outline before diving into the writing process. Without a clear plan, your ideas may be scattered and your thesis may lack coherence. Take the time to outline your main points and the evidence you will use to support them. This will help you create a stronger and more focused thesis statement.

Remember, the purpose of a thesis statement is to guide the direction of your essay and provide a clear argument. Don’t rush through this step!

Why is a strong thesis statement important in an essay?

A strong thesis statement is important in an essay because it gives the reader a clear understanding of the main point or argument of the essay. It helps to provide direction and focus to the essay, making it easier for the reader to follow and comprehend the content.

What are the key characteristics of a powerful thesis statement?

A powerful thesis statement should be clear, concise, and specific. It should clearly state the main point or argument of the essay and provide a roadmap for the reader to follow. Additionally, a strong thesis statement should be arguable, meaning that it can be supported or refuted with evidence and analysis.

How can I craft a powerful thesis statement for an essay on the novel “1984”?

To craft a powerful thesis statement for an essay on the novel “1984,” you can focus on a specific theme or aspect of the novel and make a strong argument about it. For example, you can argue that the manipulation of language and the control of information are powerful tools of oppression in the novel. Your thesis statement can then outline the evidence and analysis you will use to support your argument.

Can a thesis statement be longer than one sentence?

Yes, a thesis statement can be longer than one sentence. While it is generally recommended to keep the thesis statement concise, sometimes a more complex argument may require multiple sentences to fully articulate the main point or argument. However, it is important to ensure that each sentence contributes to the overall clarity and coherence of the thesis statement.

What should I do if I’m struggling to come up with a powerful thesis statement?

If you’re struggling to come up with a powerful thesis statement, it can be helpful to first brainstorm and gather your thoughts on the topic. Consider the main points or arguments you want to make in your essay and try to identify a central theme or focus. From there, you can draft a few different versions of a thesis statement and then choose the one that best captures your main argument and provides a clear roadmap for your essay.

What is a thesis statement?

A thesis statement is a concise and clear statement that presents the main argument or point of view of an essay or research paper. It is usually placed at the end of the introduction and serves as a guide for the reader throughout the entire piece of writing.

By Alex Koliada, PhD

Alex Koliada, PhD, is a well-known doctor. He is famous for studying aging, genetics, and other medical conditions. He works at the Institute of Food Biotechnology and Genomics. His scientific research has been published in the most reputable international magazines. Alex holds a BA in English and Comparative Literature from the University of Southern California , and a TEFL certification from The Boston Language Institute.

In George Orwell’s classic dystopian novel 1984, the majority of society is made up of a group of people known as proles. Proles, short for proletariats, are the working-class citizens of the oppressive state of Oceania, and their presence and purpose in the novel has a great deal of meaning for us today. 

The Definitive Glossary for 1984

Written by Emma Baldwin

B.A. in English, B.F.A. in Fine Art, and B.A. in Art Histories from East Carolina University.

The proles are a lower-class group of men, women, and children who live slightly outside the main Party infrastructure. These people have a degree of freedom and oppression that is different from that which Party members like Winston Smith experience.

Definition of Proles in 1984

In George Orwell’s novel 1984 , the term “proles” is used to refer to the working-class or lower-class citizens of Oceania. They are the poorest members of society and live in poverty, with little access to the luxuries enjoyed by the other classes. 

The proles make up the majority of the population, yet they are largely ignored and not granted any real rights or power. They are kept in a state of subjugation and ignorance by the government and the Inner Party , and their only hope for meaningful change is rebellion. 

Although the proles do not wield the same power as the other classes, they have the potential to become a powerful force if they choose to unite and rebel against their oppressors.

The Party claims that the proles are “natural inferiors who must be kept in subjugation,” Orwell writes. They put out propaganda, saying that they had liberated the “proles from bondage” and that they have a better life now than they had when they were:

 hideously oppressed by the capitalists, they had been starved and flogged, women had been forced to work in the coal mines (women still did work in the coal mines, as a matter of fact), children had been sold into the factories at the age of six.

Examples of Proles in 1984

One of the first references to proles in 1984 is when Winston Smith, the novel’s main character, is having a conversation with Syme , a Party member who is responsible for working on the new version of the Newspeak dictionary. 

As Syme is describing the power of Newspeak and how it’s going to cut down on topics of conversation in the future, Winston tries to interject, saying that the Proles (who are not as linguistically confined as the proper Party members) won’t be using Newspeak in the same way. Syme, though, responds by saying that: 

“The proles are not human beings,” he said carelessly. ‘By 2050—earlier, probably—all real knowledge of Oldspeak will have disappeared. The whole literature of the past will have been destroyed. Chaucer, Shakespeare, Milton, Byron—they’ll exist only in Newspeak versions […]

Later in the novel, Winston is writing in his diary, describing an encounter he had with a prostitute, something that was illegal in Oceania. Orwell wrote: 

He seemed to breathe again the warm stuffy odour of the basement kitchen, an odour compounded of bugs and dirty clothes and villainous cheap scent, but nevertheless alluring, because no woman of the Party ever used scent, or could be imagined as doing so. Only the proles used scent. In his mind the smell of it was inextricably mixed up with fornication.

Here, readers feel Winston’s judgmental opinion of Proles, judging them, to some extent, in the say way that the entirely devoted Party members do. He sees them, consciously or not, as lesser members of society. In the same section, Orwell also mentions that the proles were “not supposed to drink,” but prostitutes could be bought with “a bottle of gin.” 

What Do the Proles Represent?

In George Orwell’s dystopian novel 1984 , the proles are the bottom tier of a three-class system. They are the working class of society, people who do not hold a great deal of power or influence. They are often portrayed as having low levels of education and little to no opportunity for upward mobility. The proles represent the struggles of the working class and their lack of political freedom and basic rights. 

In the world of 1984 , the proles are treated like second-class citizens and are subjected to constant surveillance and propaganda by the government.

The proles represent the working class that is subjugated and exploited by those in power. They are a reminder of the powerlessness of the masses and how easily people can be manipulated into accepting their current state of existence.

Orwell suggests that the proles can be easily influenced and therefore need to be monitored by the government in order to maintain the current status quo. The proles represent the idea that people can be conditioned into accepting oppressive regimes if they are given no other choice.

How Do the Proles Differ from the Other Classes in 1984 ?

In George Orwell’s novel 1984 , the proles are the working class of society. They are viewed as being completely separate from the other classes: the Outer Party and the Inner Party. The proles have far fewer rights than the other classes and are largely ignored by the government. 

They have limited access to information, food, and clothing and do not have the freedom to travel outside of their own districts. In contrast, the members of the Inner and Outer Parties have access to luxuries, privileged information, and a greater degree of freedom. The proles in 1984 serve as a reminder of the power of a totalitarian regime and its ability to manipulate and oppress an entire class of people.

What does Orwell suggest about the role of the proles in society?

Orwell suggests that the proles are essential for the survival of the oppressive regime in 1984 , as they make up the majority of society and have the potential to overthrow it. He portrays them as a kind of safety valve, allowing the upper classes to maintain control over the rest of the population.

What can we learn from the proles?

We can learn the power of solidarity and resilience from the proles, who are able to survive and thrive despite oppressive conditions. Their spirit and strength remind us of the importance of standing together in the face of oppression.

Are the proles Party members in 1984 ? 

No, the proles are not members of the Party. They are the lowest class in society and lack any influence on political decision-making. The Party uses them as a means of control, keeping them content with false promises of a better future.

Related Terms in 1984

• Thoughtcrime : a term used throughout Orwell’s 1984. It is defined as thoughts that go against the political ideology of the Party. 
• Hate Week : a week of events that are designed to make the citizens of Oceania feel as much hate as possible towards certain enemies in George Orwell’s 1984.
• Doublethink : used to describe one’s capacity to hold two contradictory beliefs at one time.
• Room 101 : the designation of a particularly awful torture chamber within the Ministry of Love in 1984 .
• Speakwrite : a device that was invented by George Orwell for his novel 1984 . It is used instead of physical writing. 

Other Resources 

• Read: 1984 by George Orwell
• Read: 1984 Historical Context
• Listen : The Dystopian World of 1984 Explained

About Emma Baldwin

Emma Baldwin, a graduate of East Carolina University, has a deep-rooted passion for literature. She serves as a key contributor to the Book Analysis team with years of experience.

Cite This Page

Baldwin, Emma " Proles " Book Analysis , https://bookanalysis.com/1984/proles/ . Accessed 25 March 2024.

It'll change your perspective on books forever.

Discover 5 Secrets to the Greatest Literature

There was a problem reporting this post.

Block Member?

Please confirm you want to block this member.

You will no longer be able to:

• See blocked member's posts
• Mention this member in posts
• Invite this member to groups

Please allow a few minutes for this process to complete.