Political writing as art; all art is propaganda - Rated 
In these by times highly emotional essays written in the 1930s and 1940s George Orwell gives us with in depth analyses his personal viewpoint on the literary, political and socio-economic scene.
In literature, he sees the novel as `a Protestant form of art, a product of the free mind, of the autonomous individual.' Orwell's aim was to `push the world in a certain direction: a battle against totalitarianism and for democratic Socialism.'
In his criticism he searches for the essential (hidden) message of the author.
Dickens's rather naïve creed is: `If man would behave decently, the world would be decent.' His ideal is `a hundred thousand pounds, a quaint old house, a sweetly womanly wife, a horde of children and no work.'
Henry Miller's books are `a passive acceptance of decay and evil.'
H.G. Wells dreams of a utopian World State.
R. Kipling is a jingo imperialist, but he didn't understand that `an empire is primarily a money-making concern'.
W.B. Yeats is in essence a defender of feudalism, `a great hater of democracy and of human equality, of the modern world, science, technology and the concept of progress.'
A. Koestler's main theme is `the decadence of revolutions owing to corrupting effects of power.'
P.G. Wodehouse's real sin is to present the English upper classes as much nicer than they are.
In `Gulliver's Travels', J. Swift delivers a frontal attack on totalitarianism and shows that he is a disbeliever in the possibility of happiness.
Orwell's view on world matters is rightly `no Law, only Power'.
Nationalism is inseparable from the desire for power.
The concentration of the media in the hands of a few rich men puts the freedom of the press and intellectual liberty under attack. The `very concept of objective truth' is lost.
The Spanish war showed him the essential horror of army life.
He is extremely severe for the British establishment: `The British ruling class thought that Fascism was on their side.' For them, `it is better to inherit, than to work.' `In an England ruled by stupidity, to be `clever' was to be suspect.'
But his solution is also naïve: `common ownership of the means of production. The State, representing the whole nation, owns everything, and everyone is a State employee.' In other words, he pleads for a massive bureaucracy.
But he contradicts himself when he complains that `everything in our age conspires to turn the writer into a minor official!'
These essays contain also vivid memories of his public school life (`irrational terror') and of his Indian life ('Shooting an elephant'). He comments on sports (`war without shooting), detective stories (J.H. Chase), poetry (`the most hated art form'), mildly pornographic comic postcards (`a harmless rebellion against virtue') and ends with a superb portrait of Ghandi.
These remarkable essays, written by a fearless superb free mind, a fighter for justice and a true `révolté' (A. Camus), are a must read.
An honest journalist - Rated
Orwell - *the* iconoclast, defender of truth, and anti-authoritarian. His essays are very objective; he does not write dishonestly because of any ideological positions (indeed, he was as critical of those on the left as those on the right), and thus these essays provide a compelling contribution to our understanding of the particularly chaotic part of the century they were written in.
Wonderful - Rated
A wonderful collection of essays, ranging on topics from English cooking to democracy, from the common toad to the plight of the homeless. The essays notable both for their writing and their thoughts. And whilst not everything in the essays are correct, or in tune with my view point Orwell does at least present a different view point that in some cases challenged my own. At some point I realised I was no longer a pacifist. Highly recommended. It's worth noting that this edition does not contain a comprehensive collection of all his essays and many will have to be found in other volumes.
Orwell's/Blair's essays, an ultimate anthology? - Rated
Just over a year ago I picked up a copy of George Orwell's essays on the fly thinking one or two might be good considering the masterpiece that is "Nineteen Eighty-Four". When I received the book, complete with late 1920s socialist art on the front cover. An introduction by Orwell's biographer is quite good, and while invariably swaying into analysis of Orwell's epic novel "1984", remains a pretty good piece of commentary on Orwell's essays.
The book begins with Orwell's authoring treatise entitled "Why I Write" - this was published soon after the masterpiece of satire "Animal Farm". From there on the essays are arranged chronologically; from pieces published from 1931 regards his period of poverty and experience of "Spikes" (homeless shelters) up until 1949 with his Reflections on Gandhi essay which analyzes Gandhi's life and works, together with his ethics and influence over life in India.
He writes astutely, from the very beginning showing promise in the Plain Prose style of English which is instantaneously easy to read by practically anyone with a good understanding of the language of our fine country. In "Politics and the English language" Orwell examines and scrutinizes to great lengths how language has evolved (or be it, devolved) over the period spanning 1920 - 1940. He selects quotes randomly; choosing neither the worst nor the best but rather a smattering of random writings by various individuals.
He then systematically criticizes each and wittily advises any budding writer or reader to arm himself against the less desirable aspects of the English language's changes.
Political essays abound in this book - Orwell was personally a Democratic Socialist as another review correctly states, which equates to what the Attlee administration stood for in the late 40s. However later in life he did become more receptive to arguments from the free market orientated right (like Hayek's "Road to Serfdom", another great econo-political text).
Understandably some of these writings are outdated and seem out of touch, the now much forgotten Spanish Civil War, the Communist movement of Spain, and General Franco himself is now confined to the historical annals. Or as a sort of prefix to the devastation of World War II. Orwell's wartime essays are wonderful - not only is he capable of bringing humorous situations to light (such as P.G. Wodehouse's capture by the Nazis in Belgium during their Blitzkrieg invasion in 1940.) He comments on how Wodehouse is merely an old man, believing his predicament and subsequent bargaining with the Nazis as a bit of a joke - ironically Wodehouse would outlive Orwell by more than twenty years.
Other essays are so British that anyone from outside the UK would have trouble understanding why on earth we are as we are. A 1940 essay named "The Art of Donald McGill" provides us with this brilliant quote from one of the then semi-legal saucy postcards:
Man: "I like seeing experienced girls home..."
Woman: "But I'm not experienced!"
Man: "Your not home yet!"
Now Orwell is on the ball here; he perceives that most of McGills postcards are mere sauciness and no more - but notices a few possess a wit and guile uncommon to such material previous or since his era. McGills trial was to occur after Orwell's 1950 death; but certainly this essay sums up McGills entire career, to use a tired phrase, in a nutshell.
So, what else on the British front? British cooking - Orwell gives a brief but concise summary of our dishes after some derisive comments from abroad (which were repeated recently by Jacques Chirac, the French President quite recently - and similarly rebuked by journalists and politicians alike.)
----
The final category, if you will, is Orwell's literary analysis. Orwell's knowledge of literature, foreign and British, goes back roughly to Shakespearian times - he had little time for the legends or myths of the Medieval era and only mentions Ancient Greek works in passing. He did however, read and have extensive knowledge of The Bible - quoting Corinthians, Ecclesiastes (a fine philosophical book by any standard), and several more sections.
He states all of his favourite authors in one essay, and lenghtily analyzes certain others and/or books. His brilliant essay entitled "Charles Dickens" gives such a thorough and brutal examination of Dickensian literature aswell as the man's personality that it baffles one to see how well-read Orwell is. To (roughly) quote Stephen King:
"To become a good author, you must read for four hours and write for four hours every day."
George Orwell, or be it Eric Blair I feel kept to these rules much of his life, exceptions being his service in Burma as a young man and his period as a homeless man upon leaving the military and entering the grimy world of poverty and work as a plongeur in Paris, followed by a trip back home to London for a job that never materialized.
Leafing through my copy of this anthology I find an analysis of an obscure translation of a Leo Tolstoy pamphlet denouncing Shakespeare (whom Orwell revered, plays, poetry, everything.) The document is so obscure and dated (it was written in 1903 when Tolstoy was an old man, and concerns the existential play "King Lear" - one of Shakespeare's best in most scholar's, and my own, opinion.
He first goes along amicably with Tolstoy's grumbles and critique - before tearing it apart piece by piece; concluding on the note that nobody (or very few) will ever read or take an interest in Tolstoy's opinionated pamphlets of his later life. And, were it not for "War and Peace" and "Anna Karenina" - he butchers Tolstoy's view that the play is merely a poor take off of an earlier, better and more sensical earlier work named "King Leir" by an unknown author.
Another hard hitting, deeply affective and well written author critique is Orwell's one of Rudyard Kipling, . I feel I must quote here:
Kipling (part of poem): Down to Gehemma or up to the Throne
He travels the fastest who travels alone.
Orwell follows this up immediately with this gem of a paragraph: There is a thought vulgarly expressed. It may not be true, but at any rate it's a thought everyone thinks. Sooner or later you'll have occasion to think that he who travels fastest travels alone, and there the thought is, ready made and, as it were, waiting for you. (...)
The eerie chill of that passage leads you to remember it, as a fine adhesive it sticks...an earlier part of the essay has Orwell spotting a constant characteristic in Kipling's poetry. He quotes single lines from six poems:
"East is East, and West is West."
"The white man's burden."
"What do they know of England who only England know?"
"The female of the species is more deadly than the male."
"Somewhere East of Suez."
"Paying the Dane-Geld."
Upon noting that certain phrases such as "killing Kruger with your mouth" remained in wide use until just before 1942 when this essay was published, Orwell goes on to note:
"But what the phrases I have listed above have in common is that they are all of them phrases ones utters semi-derisively, but which one of us is bound to make use of sooner or later." This is true, and one of those phrases became the title of a pop song during the late 1990s; semi-relevant perhaps, since the song is one that is merely wary of the power of the female. Semi-derisive, if you will.
Lastly with Kipling, Orwell notes that his famous poem "If" was elevated to a near-Biblical status by the "Blimps" (ie. Conservative individuals) of the day. Orwell concludes that Kipling, due to his violent poems, had a slightly neurotic streak in him; a lust for cruelty and harm - and was in the very same tribe as the Blimps themselves; far from being a Fascist (a misnomer due to Kipling's use of the Hindu Swastika later in life) his outlook was merely that of pre-Fascist; an Edwardian era, semi-ignorant and oblivious Conservative, unaware of the economic motives behind the British Empire - devastated at its decline.
So, whether it be literary critique, political and ideological analysis, life experience and biography, or just plain good British-isms packed into essays about ourselves which remain largely relevant - then buy this book.
I took it to an authoritarian nation myself last year, (Putin's Russia, to be exact) and was dissapointed to find how rigorous police enforcement remained there. Sitting on my bed or in my chair there, reading Orwell's essays through for the second or third time it struck me that freedom is one of the most important things to be preserved - curbing it destroys society in the long run. Whether it be excessive patrols, airport strip searches, or assassination of journalists or pro-freedom politicians; it is vital we keep our liberties and our principles.
So, if I could grant this 6 stars I would. Buy this book as soon as possible; I'll be purchasing a second copy as a gift for a good friend soon - I suggest you recommend this great collection of essays to family and friends, use it to improve your own English writing skills - indeed it made me super voracious during my A Levels a year ago (I received 120/120 in a society/politics/economy Gen. Studies paper using Orwell's tenacious style of plain prose.)
Meet Mr. Blair - Rated
Meet the best prose writer in the English language (along with pre war P. G. Wodehouse) This is how to do it - access to a vast vocabulary, a mastery of grammar and syntax (and the determination to apply it) and a comprehensive knowledge derived from a deep and wide reading - all applied lightly, with a complete lack of pretension, and with the divine gift of irresistibly Good Humour (as opposed to the deliberately crude and savage kind) - so no hesitation in bracketing him and Wodehouse together.
But where Orwell scores above any other writer in his league was how much hard experience he had accumulated in his short life to set against his insights and opinions - a Police Officer in Burma, a slum dweller in Paris, a tramp in London, a wounded combatant in Spain - so that when he speaks, you listen.
With his clear uncluttered prose he conjures up worlds - a nauseating slum hospital in Paris, the Technicolor kingdoms of Seaside Postcards and Boy's Weeklies, his hellish Preparatory School in Eastbourne.
As to be expected, his analysis of Art and Literature - from Dali to Henry Miller to James Hadley Chase - is always worth reading, but perhaps more surprising is his love of nature and the English Countryside. But it was the latter that grounded him and provided a contrast to what he dedicated his life to opposing - Totalitarianism. `They' don't want you to enjoy the simple pleasures in nature (see `Some thoughts on the Common Toad')
Of course, being Orwell, Politics runs throughout all this, but don't be deterred - whatever your political orientation, this is a man who will always discuss, not harangue. In fact I recommend you read this book with a pencil to hand to highlight all the passages that apply exactly to today's world - your margins will be a mess of grey lines! The tragedy is that he didn't live longer to comment and advise and enlighten us some more. If you were to ask me to name two writers who epitomise a sort of utterly decent, good, civilised English type that can no longer exist it would be Orwell and Wodehouse - Wodehouse and Orwell.
|
