1984 Journal #3: Topic C

In 1984, Orwell creates a very powerful vision of a society in which the amount of governmental control in the everyday lives of its citizens is overly exaggerated. Orwell uses this powerful exaggeration as a wake up call to demonstrate what can happen if our government obtains too much power, and if we, as citizens, allow them to maintain so much power. While the society of Oceania that Orwell has created conveys a powerful message of warning to the reader, I do not find it to be very believable. Some of the things the government does to control its citizens would be impossible in today's world. For example, one of the main ways the government abuses their complete power is through their manipulation of history. They erase events, make up new ones, and alter others, recording all changes in the history books that only they can write. In today's world, however, there are way too many places we look for historical facts for the government to shut down or destroy every last one of them. I also don't think that the people of our society today would allow for so much government control without rebelling, simply because we have experienced freedom and will never settle for living oppressive lives. The only sort of hope I was able to find in the book is what Winston discovers - that if there is any hope of overthrowing the government, it must come from the proles. In other words, it is up to the common people of a society to come together when they recognize any sort of abuse of power happening in the government and to take action against it before it is too late.

Group Essay Thesis

Possible thesis:

Throughout 1984, Orwell uses repetition of the governmental slogan "war is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength". By doing so, he highlights the unquestioning belief in it by citizens of the society, ultimately expressing the the idea that humans find it easier to conform to an idea presented by others than to follow their own individual beliefs.

Please, please, please help make this better :). If it doesn't make sense, go ahead and fix it, or add any other thesis ideas you have. For this one, I was thinking that maybe places in the book where it is used are situations in which citizens of Oceania are showing some sort of agreement with it, like one time when it is used is during the Two Minutes Hate at the beginning of the book. This topic is kind of hard to analyze though. So I'll keep thinking.

1984 Journal #2: Topic B

In 1984, the protagonist Winston Smith is involved in a struggle against his society - the leader Big Brother and the Party . As the novel progresses, Winston begins to realize and accept his hatred towards the Party, and soon starts acting on his feelings by deliberately doing things that go against the beliefs and ideals of society. These illegal actions include writing his independent thoughts in a journal, starting an affair with a young Party member named Julia (sexual relations are illegal, especially between Party members), renting a small apartment above a shop in the prole district to carry on his affair, joining what he believes to be The Brotherhood (an organization against Big Brother and the Party), and reading a book written by Goldstein (the ultimate enemy of the Party). So far in the book, Winston has not been caught rebelling against the givernment. Therefore, I think Winston's resistance is successful to an extent. By doing the things mentioned above, he does not actually change the government that he disagrees with; however, he is able to live more freely and enjoyably than he had been before. Through his affair with Julia and the rented apartment, Winston gets a taste of how life used to be, before telescreens were created to monitor every action and the government started prohibiting the freedom to have relationships with whoever one chose. Even if his rebellious actions are going unnoticed by the government, just the fact that Winston is living free from complete control of the government (who does everything in its power to prevent independence) shows that his acts of resistance are successful, at least in his own life.

1984 Journal #1: Topic A

" It might well be that literally every word in the history books, even the things that one accepted without question, was pure fantasty [...] Everything faded into mist. The past was erased, the erasure was forgotten, the lie became truth" (Orwell 66). The society in 1984 is governed by the strict regulations held by the government over written information about the past. Through the process of keeping only selective bits from the past and erasing or altering events in history that are unpleasing in the eyes of the government, the Party in 1984 is able to obtain complete control over the citizens of Oceania - therefore creating a positive identity for itself and preventing citizens from learning from history. For example, the citizens of Oceania are not taught anything that sheds a negative light on the Party and its actions - as far as they know, their government has always been perfect. By giving citizens an immediate and unquestionable liking of their perfect Party, the government prevents rebellion based on issues and wrongdoings of the past. Along these same lines, with no record of large scale rebellions, the citizens of Oceania will be less likely to rise against the government because they do not have a guideline to base their actions upon. In section one, Winston starts realizing how much he disagrees with the manipulation of history his job at the Ministry of Truth requires, and starts taking small actions against the Party. With disgust, Winston recognizes the Party's use of this method to control society, and the obliviousness the citizens posess that allows it to happen.

The Stranger Thesis

Thesis Statement:

By contrasting the motif of the sun and sky in part one with the same motif in part two, Camus shows that a change of environment changes the meaning of familiar aspects of one's life. Because he uses a symbol of nature to convey this idea, Camus further expresses that even the most constant things in life, such as nature, are not immune to a change of meaning amidst new surroundings.

Stranger Journal #6

At the end of The Stranger, Meursault comes to the conclusion that nobody and nothing in life really matter, and that in general there is no meaning to the world. With the acceptance of this idea, Meursault is strangely comforted and realizes this is the philosophy that has made him the happiest all along. "I opened myself to the gentle indifference of the world. Finding it so much like myself - so like a brother, really - I felt that I had been happy and that I was happy again" (Camus 123). Camus does not want the reader of the book to come to the same conclusion as Meursault. From the beginning of the story, Camus sets up Meursault as an antihero. As the reader spends time discovering Meursault, a character with no expression of emotion and a sense of apathy towards the world, they have a hard time empathizing with him and pushing for him to succeed. Because Meursault is set up as an antihero who the reader does not necessary like, it is difficult for the reader to willingly agree with his actions, traits, and philosophies. Camus takes advantage of his antihero when he uses him to illustrate the philosophy of the lack of meaning of the world and its people. By demonstrating this philosophy through Meursault, Camus deliberately steers the reader away from agreeing with the idea of a world and people with no meaning.

Journal #5

Camus creates two parts to The Stranger to showcase two distinctly different sides of Meursault. Part 1 portrays him a man lacking emotion (or the ability to express it) who wastes his life watching, not doing. Meursault's apathetic nature is seen, for example, when Marie asks him if he wants to get married and he replies that it makes no difference to him, but they could if she wanted to. In Part 1, Meursault is also not aware of (or just does not care about) the emotions of others. When describing people, he sticks to the facts of what they are wearing, doing, and saying, but rarely describes how they are feeling. Since part 1 ends before Meursault goes to jail, his traits in part 1 are all those of a free man. Part 2 opens with Meursault in jail and we can begin to see the changes in his character as a prisoner. Meursault starts to express small amounts of emotion, which is a definite change from his previous lack of feelings. In addition, now that he is imprisoned, Meursault shows signs of wanting to come out of his trial innocent, longing to be out of his cell to experience the summer nights he used to love - replacing Meursault's apathetic nature from part 1 with one that shows he wants to live. Once in jail, he also becomes more aware of the feelings of others. For example, he recognizes his lawyer is upset with him: "He left, looking angry" (Camus 65). I think by giving Meursault such contrasting character traits in the two parts of the book, Camus wants the reader to examine the effects of freedom and lack of freedom on a person, and to realize how being locked up in prison can cause a person's traits and views on life to change.