Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

I finished reading a biography of George Orwell (aka Eric Blair). I have to say I'm kind of disappointed in him. Before I knew much about him, I thought he was some sort of literary and philosophical genius - especially about political philosophy. However, after reading this biography, I'm not so sure. The book paints a picture of a very bright child from a respectable family earning scholarship to Eton, and beginning a solid career as an Imperial servant in Burma, who decides that he wants to be a writer. To the surprise of his parents, he quits his job and lives a poor existence, basically almost up to the point of his death. He writes some ok novels that don't sell very well, and mostly makes his living in journalism as a book reviewer and columnist.

In his adulthood he starts to pick up political viewpoints, and finds himself fighting in Spain, ala Hemingway, before escaping back to England, narrowly avoiding imprisonment amid the turmoil of the Spanish Civil War. That romantic swashbuckling episode over, he returns to a rather poor existence, his health continuing to deteriorate due to a life-long lung problem. His wife eventually dies while he is in Europe covering the end of WWII. About this time his first real success occurs with "Animal Farm". His health continues to deteriorate, to the point that he rushes to finish his masterpiece before he dies. At his death, the first reviews of "1984" were being published, and after he died his new widow (who he married on his deathbed) became wealthy due to this runaway best-seller.

What disappointed me about him is that he just wasn't all that wonderful. Everyone has personal faults, and I won't bother to go into his here, but the professional faults are what really disappointed me. I read one of his first books "Down and Out in Paris and London" and a book of collected essays. Although I read these almost 10 years ago, I can still remember some of the passages describing the terrible conditions of the poor in Britain, the horrible working environments of the British coal miners in the north of England, and the terrible state of the public school system in the essay "Such, Such Were the Joys". The author of this biography points out that all of these works have a kernel of truth, but are greatly exaggerated. I find these essays now to be too close to a lie. For real historical accuracy, I have to discount all that I read of his non-fiction work.

The happy exception, though are his fictional works "Animal Farm" and "1984". Since these works are ficticious, they are not subject to his eyewitness exaggerations. Growing up during the Cold War, I still have an interest in the workings of totalitarian societies. These don't really exist any more (or at least they currently don't exist), but for most of the 20th century it looked like the world was heading towards an authoritarian existence. I find them scary but fascinating, and wonder at stories of individuals coping in such a world, and finding ways to resist and lead some sort of independent life, even if only inside their head.

"Animal Farm" tells the story of a dictatorship arising out of a barnyard of animals, a not-so veiled critique of the Soviet Union at the time it was written. "1984", however, stands out as one of the classics of the dystopia genre, and is perhaps my most favorite book. Describing a world of three totalitarian superpowers who are continually at war with each other, it tells the story of an individual who fights to keep his individuality in a society where every move, every word is monitored, and the past altered to keep the party line.
While reading it, you can't help but note some parallels to modern society. I won't go in to a full review here, but I will say it did put Orwell on the map, unfortunately after he died. I guess in summary, that's the theme with Orwell - unfortunate disappointment.