The dystopian novel 1984, written in 1948 and published a year later, has been held up as a warning to current and future societies about the dangers of a society in which every thought, word, and action is monitored by Big Brother; in which citizens fear their neighbors and even their children; in which technology and mass propaganda create a false reality; in which victory in a perpetual war is the justification for the government’s authoritarianism. This essay will explore some of these ideas and prove to modern readers that at least some of the dystopian elements of the novel have become our reality in 2024. 
use attached rubric in pdf document.
below is pages 6-10:
Surveillance is very prominent in our world today, making Democratic senators call for federal oversight of facial recognition because of potential bias and potential civil rights violations. It is the Department of Justice’s job to ensure that these civil liberties are protected and that there is no racial bias. In the article “Washington Takes Aim at Facial Recognition Technology,” Alfred Ng writes about these U.S. senators who are concerned about facial recognition software for civil rights. Ng explains that “The senator’s letter also cited a POLITICO investigation finding that New Orleans police disproportionately used facial recognition on Black suspects. The committee behind the National Academies report raised similar concerns with racial bias and facial recognition, noting that even if the technology were perfect, human bias could still create disparities” (Ng par. 8). Facial recognition technology is disproportionately used on Black suspects by the New Orleans police, showing potential racial bias. Things such as surveillance technology can be used to target and oppress specific groups within their society. Similarly to 1984, the government uses surveillance to control and monitor all people, creating an environment with the dangers of unchecked surveillance and abusive power. An example of this in the novel’s first part is an interaction between the main character, Winston, and a woman he believes to be a government spy – wondering how much he is being watched. We are told, “It was terribly dangerous to let your thoughts wander when you were in any public place or within range of a telescope. The smallest thing could give you away. A nervous tic, an unconscious look of anxiety, a habit of muttering to yourself – anything that carried with it the suggestion of abnormality, of having something to hide. In any case, to wear an improper expression on your face…was itself a punishable offense” (Orwell 62). Interactions such as this can instill fear and self-censorship within the people of their community, constantly under the eyes of the Party’s telescreens. Both 1984 and the article highlight the dangers of surveillance, where individuals are monitored continuously. While 1984 is technically a dystopia where the government uses telescreens to control every aspect of the citizens’ lives, there are parallels in today’s world. Current law enforcement has been shown to abuse this surveillance and danger the civil liberties and privacy of their citizens.
Over time, it has become increasingly easier to somewhat erase and rewrite history. With the advancement in technology and the widespread information in our hands, it has become easy to change what we once knew in the past. Even things such as our favorite childhood books are not safe from our evolving society. In his article, “Ronald Dahl books rewritten to remove language deemed offensive,” Hayden Vernon discusses the rewrites and significant vocabulary changes in Ronald Dahl’s book, such as changing Oompa Loompas to be gender neutral and using “enormous” instead of “fat.” Vernon notes, “In previous editions of James and the Giant Peach, the Centipede sings: “Aunt Sponge was terrifically fat / And tremendously flabby at that,” and, “Aunt Spiker was thin as a wire / And dry as a bone, only drier.” , “Both verses have been removed, and in their place are the rhymes: “Aunt Sponge was a nasty old brute / And deserved to be squashed by the fruit,” and, “Aunt Spiker was much of the same / And deserves half of the blame, ”that “References to “female” characters have disappeared. Miss Trunchbull in Matilda, once a “most formidable female”, is now a “most formidable woman” and “Gender-neutral terms have been added in places – where Charlie and the Chocolate Factory’s Oompa Loompas were “small men”, they are now “small people”. The Cloud-Men in James and the Giant Peach have become Cloud-People.” (Vernon 9). Roald Dahl’s books raised concerns from individuals and advocacy groups who found certain language and depictions within the texts to be offensive or potentially harmful to those reading. Much like the alterations made to Roald Dahl’s books, in 1984, history is also manipulated, and the language is controlled, showing how our evolving society changes present narratives. A scene from 1984 clearly paints a picture of the similar public’s control over the media and history they once knew. The protagonist, Winston, reflects on how the Party essentially manipulated every part of their society. He notes, “Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book has been rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street and building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And that process is continuing day by day and minute by minute.” (Orwell 115). This can be a testament to how documentation, from records to books, can either be destroyed or altered to a specific narrative. The revisions made to Roald Dahl’s books and the manipulation of information in “1984” both show how language and narratives can be controlled to fit specific agendas. Just as the Party in Orwell’s novel changes records and rewrites history, society’s changes in literature reflect our evolving world. Both instances show how power dynamics shape perceptions and why it is crucial to truly understand the world around us.
In an era of instant communication, groupthink remains a persistent issue in various settings, including workplaces, social circles, and online communities. Politics can result in policy decisions based on loyalty or fear rather than their actual opinions. It can also lead to poor decision-making because of the fear of being different. YiLin Lee, a Program Assistant with the GO Project, helped create “GROUPTHINK AS A SYSTEM OF THE DECISION MAKING PROCESS” with Applied Psychology at NYU Steinhardt. The source cites “groupthink” as “ a phenomenon that occurs when members of a group prioritize unanimity over a realistic appraisal of the situation at hand.” (Lee 1) This can be in situations as simple as a discussion between friends, all the way up to deciding who to vote for for president. “In modern society, a majority of decisions are highly dependent on groups. Small-scale groups such as sports teams, families, and even students enrolled in the same class make decisions on a daily basis. Furthermore, large-scale and high-stakes groups such as the United States Senate, jury panels, Boards of Directors, and the United Nations are all examples of groups in charge of decisions that have widespread consequences.” The concept of groupthink illustrates the different levels of decision-making, from personal interactions to significant political institutions. In Orwell’s 1984, the Party’s manipulation and control over group dynamics show the dangers of groupthink versus individual thought. In the novel, there is a scene showing the Two Minute Hate, which once commenced had the people of the party interacting with all types of propaganda, specifically of Emmanuel Goldstein. It is noted that “Before the Hate had proceeded for thirty seconds, uncontrollable exclamations of rage were breaking out from half the people in the room.” The Two Minute Hate had an intense atmosphere, with individuals succumbing to the energy around them, eventually filling many of the people in the room with this uncontrollable rage. The Two Minutes Hate scene mirrors modern-day groupthink, where we focus on conformity over critical thinking. Like in the novel, we can see how group dynamics can influence decisions based on loyalty rather than genuine opinions, like how Winston is a part of it but does not actively want to participate. The impact of groupthink, from personal interactions to political areas, shows why 1984 should be a warning in today’s world.
For America to be the “Land of the Free” it does not always feel that way, especially with our voices and freedom of speech. Freedom of speech is the first amendment in the U.S. Constitution and should be valued. Unfortunately, as a country we exercise our freedom of speech, less and less, every day, with fear of repercussions. The Siena College Research Institute released an article in March of 2022, showing the statistics of how much of a problem being afraid to exercise freedom of speech is. The Institute notes that “Eighty-four percent of Americans say that some Americans not exercising their freedom of speech in everyday situations due to fear of retaliation or harsh criticism is either a very (40%) or somewhat (44%) serious problem…Over half, 55%, of Americans say that they have held their tongue, that is, not spoken freely over the last year because they were concerned about retaliation or harsh criticism, and compared to 10 years ago by 46-21%, …and by 35-28% less, rather than more, free to discuss issues of race.” (Siena College Research Institute par. 1).