Home
Creators
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Community
Telegram ThePornDude
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four: Pt.2 Ch.V-Pt.3 Ch.VI (Dystopian Double Bill) (Patreon)

Published:
2025-06-29 20:54:27
Imported:
2026-06
Tags:
haven't archived this post yet. have a subscription? use the importer!

Downloads

  • orwell final dystopian hlbc.mp3

Missing 1 full-res photo, 1 file, as this post has not yet been imported.

Content

'If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face - forever.'

Today we are rounding off our Dystopian Double Bill with a deep appreciation of the ending of George Orwell's nightmarish novel Nineteen Eighty-Four.

We're discussing reader theories about the dystopian world, love as antidote to fear and hate, confession under tyranny, words and actions vs feelings, the reason for everlasting war, perception vs reality, how to effect change through literature, and much more.

Timestamps:

0:00 the ending of this iconic novel

2:00 from science fiction to gothic horror

3:00 healing love under totalitarianism 

4:00 spiritual distress manifests in the body

6:00 Julia’s conspiracy theory about the war

8:00 ‘the past has actually been abolished’

10:00 how governments gaslight the people

12:00 how do we know what we know?

14:00 physical objects store memories

16:00 relation of thinking, being & knowing

18:00 what does confession mean in Oceania?

20:00 ‘what you say or do doesn’t matter’

22:00 ‘but they can’t get inside you…’

24:00 don’t say what you don’t believe

26:00 is the inner heart impregnable? 

28:00 Winston & Julia meet O’Brien

30:00 absurdity of ends justifying means

32:00 trying to join the Brotherhood 

34:00 finding meaning in loving embrace

36:00 ‘you will always be in the dark’

38:00 ‘the place where there is no darkness’

40:00 reading Emmanuel Goldstein’s book

42:00 appreciating the act of reading

44:00 ‘it is always the same war…’

46:00 where have our dreams gone?

48:00 why is there always a war on?

50:00 how the superstates developed

52:00 why Orwell speaks to us today

54:00 the consciousness of being at war

56:00 do war-mongers believe what they say?

58:00 are all political ideologies the same?

59:00 most important prose of the century

1:00:00 the meaning of ‘war is peace’

1:02:00 three groups: high, middle & low

1:04:00 George Orwell vs Karl Marx

1:06:00 how revolutions become tyrannies

1:08:00 effecting change through literature

1:09:00 why don’t the masses revolt?

1:10:00 hereditary vs adoptive organisations

1:11:00 could reading have saved Winston?

1:12:00 caught by the Thought Police

1:14:00 actions contain their consequences

1:16:00 Winston Smith vs O’Brien

1:17:00 demonstration of linguistic relativity

1:18:00 our perception influences reality

1:19:00 when two plus two make five

1:20:00 ‘no martyrdoms in this world’

1:22:00 the commandment of the Party

1:24:00 changing one’s belief to survive

1:25:00 does Big Brother actually exist?

1:27:00 power for its own sake as motive

1:28:00 my personal definition of God

1:30:00  is there really an objective reality?

1:32:00 reader theories about Orwell’s world

1:34:00 does the Brotherhood actually exist?

1:35:00 ‘if you want a picture of the future…’

1:36:00 Winston as the last man in Europe

1:37:00 what does a tyranny fear most?

1:38:00 converting hope into knowledge

1:39:00 those who love hate fear love

1:40:00 Winston Smith & rats in Room 101

1:42:00 ‘Do it to Julia! Do it to Julia! Not me!’

1:44:00 love proves itself in sacrifice

1:45:00 what happens to Winston & Julia?

1:46:00 what is the antidote to fear & hate?

1:47:00 the ending of Nineteen Eighty-Four

1:48:00 my main takeaway from this novel

1:49:00 what did you make of this book?

1:50:00 preparing for our reading of Homer

Resources to Explore:

  • Room 101: The term Room 101 has entered the collective imagination and given rise to a classic British television series (based on a radio series), which has been hosted by Nick Hancock, Paul Merton, and Frank Skinner. Public figures are invited on to discuss their pet hates, trying to persuade the host to consign them into Room 101. Here are a few great episode clips to check out: Stephen Fry, Spike Milligan, Jeremy Clarkson, Jonathan Ross. There are also some very funny segments from the Ricky Gervais Show with Steve Merchant and Karl Pilkington where Karl is tasked with consigning his pet peeves to Room 101.

  • Big Brother: We also have George Orwell to thank for one of the most influential reality television series. Premiering around a decade-and-a-half after Orwell's dystopia, the show is built from 24/7 surveillance of 'housemates' confined to a house isolated from the rest of the world. If you want to check out the outrageous depravity the show would devolve into, you can check out compilations of the drama here and here.

  • Film Appreciation: If you managed to give yourself a screening of one of the film adaptations of George Orwell's novel, what did you make of the directorial decisions? And if you're in the mood for more horror, then the post-apocalyptic 28 Years Later, directed by Danny Boyle, is in currently in the cinema. As a big fan of the first two, I'm very excited to watch this one and would love to hear what you make of it. The Handmaid's Tale has excitingly also just run through its final season. A few more films that present dystopian worlds that I personally love include: Never Let Me Go, Blade Runner, Snowpiercer, The Truman Show, and Battle Royale. What are your favourite films from the science fiction/dystopian genre? And are they more Huxleyean or Orwellian in their outlook?

  • Non-Fiction: If you would like some options of compelling non-fiction works that probe into any of the ideas these works of dystopian fiction prompt us to consider, then here are a few select recommendations: The Origins of Totalitarianism by Hannah Arendt, Man's Search for Meaning by Viktor Frankl, Obedience to Authority by Stanley Milgram, Surveillance Capitalism by Shoshana Zuboff, and The Road to Serfdom by F. A. Hayek.

  • Documentaries: For a wonderful documentary about the writer of Nineteen Eighty-Four, check out The Real George Orwell. There is also a great documentary from Absolute History that explores the prophetic power of the writer. And for a splendid discussion on Orwell's beliefs, this video from Biographics is very interesting. For an exploration about the influential relationship of Huxley and Orwell, this documentary is also very good.

Our Next Masterpiece: 

Congratulations on bringing yourself so powerfully to the iconic dystopian novels of George Orwell and Aldous Huxley. You should feel intensely proud of your accomplishment. This coming weekend, we will be hopping back in our time machine and going from a dystopian future to the world of Ancient Greece. We will move into the next exciting part of our reading adventure with our introductory 'how to read' video for the epics of Homer. Reading these sublime foundational works of Western Literature will open up the entire tradition of great literature.

In our intro video, we will discuss everything from our practical approach, pacing, and recommended translations to themes, genre, characters, ancient poetics, socio-historical context, and much more. We'll also talk about how we will break up our reading of the two epics up by enjoying an adventurous read-through of The Three Musketeers. You don't need to read anything just yet, but, if you are keen to dive in, you might like to deep-read the first book of the Iliad, which we're starting with, to ease into the shift from Modern to Ancient literature.

The main thing you want to do right now is to secure your copies of the books. I'll be working mainly from the Lombardo translation (here), whilst bringing in several other translation examples to contrast and compare as we go, but please feel free to use the editions you like and that come most easily to hand. We'll talk about how we are beautifully spoilt for choice when it comes to Homer: Fagles, Fitzgerald, Lattimore, Mendelsohn, Wilson, Rieu are just a few examples of powerful translators that resonate with different readers (it would also be fun if we're working from a variety of versions). I am tremendously excited to share this next leg of the adventure with you and am so grateful that you have made our read-throughs for the first half of the year so rewarding.

Questions to Consider:

1) What would be in Room 101 for you?

2) What did you make of the ending of Nineteen Eighty-Four? What are your theories for what happened after Winston's story and up to the time of the appendix?

3) What are we without our memories? Why is a shared collective past important?

4) Why is Orwell keen to show that words and actions matter more than feelings?

5) How would you persuade another to read Orwell and Huxley? And what advice would you give to facilitate a meaningful reading experience?

And please do share with us your impressions and favourite passages from this work. Let us know the highlights of your time spent in both dystopian worlds.

Congratulations on bringing yourself so powerfully to Brave New World and Nineteen Eighty-Four!

Files

Previews only

Comments

Paula Baker

I am late to hearing the lecture and posting! Firstly, thank you Benjamin for a superb lecture! This read of 1984 was much better and more thoughtful for me than my first read of it so many years ago. I have also benefited greatly from reading our readers' comments - they are all so good! What impressed me most was how Orwell made O'Brien a Satan character, in my opinion. O'Brien reads Winston's mind, knows when he is lying, gets into his mind to brainwash, and ultimately is consumed with the need for power. O'Brien wants to destroy individuality and basically the core of the human person. Benjamin stated how the devil (Satan) first convinces humanity that he doesn't exist, and then convinces that the individual doesn't exist! What a true and brilliant observation! Certainly, O'Brien is sadistic in his torture of Winston and ultimately wanting "loyalty/devotion" to Big Brother... who I believe is O'Brien. Thank goodness for the appendix (which I admit I did not read carefully). It does give the reader a hope that this sadistic, horrific society did not ultimately "win". I could not dwell too heavily on our dystopian double feature - it was depressing! But, both Huxley and Orwell are vital reads to keep us aware of the dangers of what power in governing people can do. I do see aspects of both books in our culture today and it is scary. Reading the Bible and all the great works of literature (thanks to HCLB) keeps our minds alert and our souls aware of what is True. Some of our HCLB reads have been a delight for me (Far from the Madding Crowd, Jane Eyre, The Sound and the Fury, The Brothers Karamazov to name a few) while others have been "important" reads for me, although not really enjoyable (Invisible Man, BNW, and 1984). I know I need both but I am very ready to escape from these dystopian worlds and dive into Dumas and Homer!

Carrol Firmage

I am glad to have reread both BNW and 1984, although it would be a stretch to say I enjoyed them. As others have said, though, very important reads for right now as was The Sound and the Fury for me. I will add that if you want to read more about Orwell, I highly recommend Orwell’s Roses by Rebecca Solnit. She is a great writer and essayist and in this book takes a look at Orwell’s connection to nature. I really enjoyed getting to know Orwell’s better through this lens rather than just 1984.

Laurie Stone Haskell

How do I get a message to Benjamin? I have tried everything to reach him. I am no longer receiving my email links to his lectures and I am a member. I have reached out to Patreon but am not receiving help with this from them. Can someone help to direct me? Thank you.

Danny

This is very long; I say that because I don't want you to waste your time if you're not in the mood for something long and controversial. THOUGHT AND LANGUAGE (1st preliminary) Vygotsky said that “thought is not merely expressed in words; it comes into existence through them.” Therefore, similar to Benjamin, I believe that you can freely think only when everyone can freely speak. PRELIMINARY (2nd preliminary) Before I write more, I should first tell you that I am in favor of you believing whatever it is you believe. My perspective is likely very different from yours. Everyone here has been nice to me. And some of the most loving and tolerant people I have ever met are Democrats. Therefore, when I speak negatively in this comment, I am, for the most part, speaking of politicians; and I write this comment with the assumption that everyone here is tolerant and caring, because I have evidence of it in reading your comments. In fact, you’re probably more caring and loving than I am (I cannot stress this paragraph enough). Many people here have given their perspective on how the Orange Man is bad (and I don’t know why he paints himself orange). What proceeds is my perspective, or a piece of my perspective, on how the Democratic Party desires to be Orwellian. Whether my perspective is true is not my place to decide for you. I also understand that the best way is for me to reflect on my own Orwellian tendencies instead of someone else's tendencies. But I do not take my advice, in this comment. ABBREVIATIONS The part about using abbreviated words so that you could say them without thinking reminds me of terms like "prolife," "pro-choice," and "Antifa." Prolife people are often more accurately anti-abortion and pro-choice people are often more accurately pro-abortion. Both groups, by design, use the labels that make it uncomfortable for people to disagree. We can say Antifa without thought. But say "The person is in the Anti-fascist group,” and we then must "linger at least momentarily” (317-318) on the words. We might begin to compare the group’s actions to fascists, and thereby see that Antifa seeks to make political and social change through fear, violence, and intolerance, a method that is shared by fascists, and may be the real defining attribute of a fascist. Either way, it is the method of a fascist that is most terrifying. So, practically, they might as well be fascists, at least so far as the way they treat people they disagree with. The cure: Just say "Antifa" and we don't have to linger long enough to see their true nature. LOGIC AND OBJECTIVITY “In the end the Party would announce that two and two made five, and you would have to believe it” (82). This reminds me of a war against science, biology, math, and logic by the Democratic Party. We are not allowed to think and speak reality; or, at the very least these things get negative labels. NEWSPEAK I was blown away when reading about Newspeak. And the crimestop and how people alter definitions in one moment, only to switch when needed. Never before had I seen written so clearly what I see the American Democratic Party has done for the past … long time. Orwell explained my inner feelings that I didn’t know how to put into words, and still can’t as good as he did. Newspeak's purpose was "to make all other modes of thought impossible" (309). First, I repeat that I am happy for you to think whatever you want about any of the topics I mention; I am not trying to change your mind about what you believe. Rather, I am thinking about the book we’ve read together and comparing it to my life. The purpose of the phrase "cisgender male," where cisgender means "a person whose gender identity corresponds with the sex assigned at birth," is the same as Newspeak's purpose. People now refer to me as a cisgender male (sometimes, even choices in forms do not include the option for just "male"). Because a label with no definition is meaningless, then it's not only the label I use, but also—and mostly—my definition of that label that is part of my identity. So, if I merely stood firm by responding, "No, I'm not a cisgender male; I am a male," then I'd get skeptical looks and be on thin ice at work for balking at the label they’d prefer me to adopt. But if I followed up my label by defining what the label means to me, that is, by saying "I am a male, which is one of two human sexes," then I'd lose my job or they'd find a way to push me out. If I said it near the wrong person, I risk being physically attacked. This is happening because people strive, by controlling acceptable speech about identity, to make my mode of thinking impossible. Importantly, thought control is wrong even if I'm incorrect about my definition of a male. I should be allowed to be incorrect about my identity. This is about freedom to think my own thoughts. Even the word "mother" is now taboo, the Biden administration instead using “birthing person.” The American Democratic Party is not just fighting for policies, they’re fighting to control my thoughts; but in the end, they don't want to control thoughts, because their end goal is to erase the possibility of certain thoughts. Over time, if they win the culture war (and they almost certainly will), this conversation won't even be possible to have because we won't have the words. Again, you may identify however you desire around me and my friends. I know this is a hot topic and that there are people on the political Right who are also intolerant and hateful, and so I therefore want to make sure I repeat that I have no desire to take away your choice in what you believe about yourself and the world. CRITICAL THEORY: with special note of DEI People for a while have been mandated to use DEI words and phrases, and goals, in their application for grants, application for jobs, etc. Actually, it’s hard to believe, but I know of a grant application that was rejected last week because it did not include enough DEI language and goals. I was surprised, given that Trump is in office. Students in some universities have been forced to agree with critical theory beliefs (which include, but is not limited to, stuff like DEI). Critical theory is a system of beliefs, held to with religious fervor, that is far reaching and even includes beliefs about who you are at your core. So students are, widely, being pressured to mold their self-concept in a way that is acceptable to the Democratic Party. Eventually, a self-concept that contradicts that which is acceptable to the Democratic Party will be impossible. LEADER WORSHIP Kids at B. Bernice Young Elementary School were made to worship Obama, applying the words in a worship song meant for Jesus instead to Obama. Since that’s a public school, it was the same as the government forcing children to worship Obama. OTHER STUFF The Democratic Party also used the IRS, from 2010 to 2012, to interfere with the election by squashing grass-root conservative movement to get out the vote. Though nobody was convicted, the IRS did issue an apology and has settled out of court. They support and encourage political violence and even bail out of jail violent people. Their fearful and hateful rhetoric is responsible for multiple mass shootings, including shootings like at the Family Research Council and at Annual Congressional Baseball game. Also, the fear and hatred they’ve encouraged is probably responsible for the assassination attempts against Trump. Suffice to say, I live with great concern that Democratic Party will win and that, in the end, probably before my children are elderly, my mode of thinking will be illegal, if not impossible. Language in general is under constant attack. The way that Party talks about people like me, I wouldn’t be shocked if I got sent to a concentration camp before turning 90. THE END Such fearful talk, though, is very capable of making me hate people. The antidote to this, for me, is remembering always those people who vote Democrat who are wonderful, loving, caring, and tolerant people. That same antidote also, in turn, makes me less fearful. I am confident that there are good people abiding all throughout the political spectrum. I could not get away from all the above thoughts while reading 1984. But I'm also aware that the book, the book as a warning, will not work unless everyone, myself included, looks in the mirror. So I commit to doing that, from time to time. And I'm sorry for any fear you might have because of people like me. I wish that it was not that way.

Danny
>>179509650

Laurie, I'm not sure this will work, but if you click on "Hardcore Literature Book Club with Benjamin McEvoy" it will take you to the homepage. On my computer, his homepage has the "message" button near the top right. Good luck.

Danny
>>179480789

This book was also depressing for me. I'm trying to talk my wife into reading it so that we can discuss it. I joined the club after he did Jane Eyre. But my wife and I are joining my church's Classics Book Club in the fall, and we are scheduled to read Jane Eyre and have bimonthly meetings on it. Is Jae Eyre appropriate for an 11 year old?

jschase
>>179525016

I appreciate your candor Danny. You have made some valid points, I believe. The lessons from these two books, and many others are one's we can't seem to learn from for any length of time, with some degree of certainty. As I have communicated here with others it seems there is a general agreement that there is too much corruption; too much abuse and distortion of free market economics; too much dictating what speech is allowed, and not; too much abuse of technology etc., by those inhabiting the power structures ie governments; foundations; academia; NGO's etc., Yet there remains a desire to permit these entities their power so we can have all the social engineering that so many desire. Of course as is made clear in the books in question, this almost never ends well. If we don't have the confidence in ourselves to minimize this possibility by minimizing the size of the Central government ( and related) and making our communities thrive through our own direct participation, then we will exist in an ever increasing Brave New World and a world of INGSOC and DOUBLESPEAK. It's clear most of us want to have a society where there is benevolence and compassion; a sense of a shared cultural identity; the rule of law; and the freedom to think and imagine and speak for one's self, but it's not entirely clear now if we, as a whole, want to make the effort and sacrifice to make it happen. Orwell and Huxley have made it clear through their stories that the attempt at perfection human nature only results in misery. Appreciate your joining the discussion.

Jane Knights

I was thinking how both books try to discourage emotional attachments. BNW treats sex as simply physical pleasure by encouraging careless promiscuity while 1984 allows sex only for procreation and even then sexual enjoyment is forbidden. It seems as if in both dystopias human connection is seen as ultimate threat to totalitarianism. Maybe that offers us hope today?

Alexander Najarian

I think the party will be defeated by love. I was struck by Ben’s belief (which I share) that God is love, and by the note that O’Brien seemed afraid of God, and by my feeling that true love is notoriously absent in the novel. The concept of love throughout the book is quite shallow, from Julia’s “I love you” note to a total stranger to having “love” for semi fictional political figurehead big brother. The possible example of real love, Winston’s mother’s love for him, has clearly left a profound impact but Winston is unable to articulate his feelings. Maybe that is by design since there is an attack on both familial and romantic relationships in this society. But I think that true love exists and is fundamental to human existence, and so it can’t be conditioned out of humanity by the party. Perhaps it is at least part of what Winston means when he mentions the human spirit will defeat the party. True love to me involves self sacrifice. As a parent, Room 101 would involve some kind of harm to my children. I already sense a blind spot in the Room 101 torture method, since this fear embodies the notion of self sacrifice. If faced with torture I’d like to think I would say “do it to me” rather than put my loved ones in harms way. I think we are all at least capable of a love for which we would choose to endure our worst fears and sacrifice ourselves, and it is unreasonable to think that no single person will make that sacrifice. Per O’Brien’s explanation, martyrdom and ultimately the downfall of the party, would be the inevitable result.

Renata

Apologies if this has already been asked but has anyone read Julia by Sandra Newman? I’m curious about it but not sure if I want to or not.

jschase
>>179902695

I've never heard of the retelling until now. I looked it up. The premise is interesting, but I'm skeptical...though I am going to see if I can get a copy from the library and give it a go. Thanks for pointing it out.

Mayelin Garcia

Sorry for coming so late to comment on this post. I have to thank Ben for these two reads, one more time. I think I would have never picked up these books by myself. I am very familiar with totalitarian regimes. I was born and raised in one. The Cuba of Fidel Castro. I knew what I was about to read about , specially in 1984. This one in particular was a painful reading and at the same time extraordinary. I can’t stop thinking that this book was written in 1949 and that the Cuban revolution was in 1959, so as of today, I am pretty sure Fidel read this book very carefully. More than the 90% of this book really resonates a lot with my experience back in my country, and with the stories that my father used to tell me very quitely. Definitely the fear, the surveillance, the propaganda, the lack of trust between each other in the society, all this it is very fresh in my mind. I believe right now we are living in a combination of these two dystopians. Brave New World is very present in many ways in our society too. I think we should keep our eyes wide open, democracy and freedom cannot be taken for granted ever.

Danny
>>179762692

Alexander, I agree with you that someone would make the sacrifice. But it might take a long time, due to the systematic breakdown of the family; and that might be the flaw in our thinking. Would you be willing to sacrifice your life for a person (your kid) who is eager to have you tortured or killed? That seems to be what children were to parents in this book (or parents were to children).

Eliza

The “endless present” is such an interesting concept. My son is 2, and we spend a lot of time in the library - and I’ve noticed the distinct absence of any books for children written before roughly 1990 on the shelves (excluding a few perennial classics such as The Tiger who came to Tea or The Very Hungry Caterpillar). In fact, I’d say most of the books available appear to have been written within the past 10 years or so, particularly those written for a YA audience. I have wondered on a few occasions whether we can really expect young people to think for themselves if they only have access to the most current opinions and “acceptable” thought, especially as old books are routinely censored and memory-holed. Are they living in a horrible kind of endless present???