1984: Literary Analysis

1016 Words5 Pages
Was the Novel’s Ending Appropriate? How did the party and big brother manage to stay in power? Emmanuel Goldstein, the enemy of the party, is used as a scapegoat for all of the party’s problems, and is used as an excuse to always be at war with one of the surrounding empires of Eastasia and Eurasia. In the end of the book, Winston comes to accept the party over all aspects of his life, even coming to believe that he loved big brother, who he had hated at the beginning of the book. Readers are often angered by the ending of 1984 because of Winston’s betrayal of his previous life for the acceptance of the party. This is a semi-appropriate ending because of the impossibility of going against the party because of their total control of all people’s lives through the use of fear, which had not been accomplished by any authoritarian regime before the rise of the party. The novel’s ending was semi-appropriate because it stresses a society where all people are equal, but on the contrary makes it so that people must give up all of their freedoms and have all of their aspects of life controlled to conform to the standards of the society. The party controls people’s lives off of three founding philosophies “war is peace, freedom is slavery, and ignorance is strength. (Orwell 26) War is peace refers to the fact that if the party always frames another enemy to direct all hate towards. As long as the society has an enemy, the people will always work together equally under the guidance of the party to ensure its safety. This makes all people equal, but at the mercy of the all powerful party. Freedom is slavery is the philosophy that freedom is the desire of all human beings under the pressure of an authoritarian society. Too much freedom can make that desire uncontrollable, and the authoritarian regime then falls to the mercy of the people of society. The party
Open Document