I grew up in a household where everyone loved to read. Books were everywhere, with wall-to-wall bookcases lining my father’s study, spilling over into the hallway, but also books left around on living or dining room tables.
No wonder all five children in my family were college graduates and three went on to become teachers. The earliest environment instilled in us a love of books and learning.
The only time I remember getting into trouble over books was when without my parents’ consent I ordered a multi-set edition of the Great Books of the Western World that had to be returned by my father because of their cost. He warned me about my behavior but advised me to visit the local library.
Perhaps my early love of books explains why the infusion of electronic versions bothers me — the loss of paper covers and pages and the feel of a real book in my hands. I know the environmental argument that going electronic saves trees. Banning drilling saves more trees, I’d bet. It bothers me more when books are banned for no other reason than they offer views contrary to the prevailing ethos or when colleges cut back on liberal arts courses to balance shrinking budgets.
I still believe in the power of learning through books to improve one’s life. Perhaps this is why I applaud colleges that offer courses where students read and discuss the classics in many fields, often from the series prepared by the University of Chicago, St. John’s College in Annapolis, Md., is known for this kind of learning. Of course, as Mark Twain wrote, “A classic is something that everybody wants to have read and nobody wants to read.” Lucky for me I read and loved the classics because I grew up reading them and because of a two-year college course modeled after the great books curriculum.
In the great books course I took, students were given the chance to suggest books to read. One chosen in my class was “1984” by George Orwell, an imaginative story about the societal consequences of totalitarianism, focused on the Josef Stalin-era Soviet Union and Nazi Germany. This book changed how I thought about the world in which I lived then and how I think about it now
Some of the concepts in that novel feel strikingly modern such as Big Brother, Ministry of Truth, two plus two equals five, Thought Police, Newspeak. Today we use different words but with similar meanings such as the deep state or fake news. And with the advent of artificial intelligence, who knows what deep and dangerous worlds await us?
The opening words in Orwell’s novel are both an enticement for readers to continue reading and a clue to the strange world about to unfold: “It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking thirteen.” As soon as you read these opening words of the classic 1949 novel you know something is wrong. You can’t trust the clock or the time.
In this Orwellian universe life is turned upside down. War is peace, freedom is slavery, and most especially lies are presented as truths — all by some all-pervasive power called “Big Brother.”
The main character in “1984” is Winston Smith, who follows the party line that attempts to control the narrative to protect those in its power through lies — until few even recognize the truth. Those who try to be truthful are found out by Big Brother and persecuted for “thoughtcrimes.” Winston realizes his greatest crime is thinking for himself because he has been told “to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears.”
As he begins to think for himself, Winston realizes he is not only motivated by lies but always being watched to see if he believes them: “The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.”
At the end of the novel, Big Brother wins with these chilling last words describing Winston’s loss of individuality and his submission: “He loved Big Brother.” Big Brother in Orwell’s novel represented totalitarianism or the control of a country by a single leader or party.
If you have never read “1984,”, it might be a good time to do so because it offers insights into issues today — lies to support a point of view to promote those in power, propaganda to shape public opinion, the slow eradication of personal freedom and the demise of democracy.
Orwell’s novel is not a particularly comforting tale but one that helps us to understand ourselves better today. “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it,” wrote the philosopher George Santayana in his 1905 book, “The Life of Reason.”
The forces of mass propaganda and control in our times, especially through social media, seem almost too powerful to overcome. We are besieged with too much information, leaving us confused or with only one source of information and thus open to only one point of view.
How is one to sort out lies and truths, reality from hallucination, facts from fantasies? The best answer I have found is to use the mind one has been given. Use your reason to sort things out as best you can. Or as Orwell writes: “To see what is in front of one’s nose.” But he cautions that this requires a constant struggle.
In times such as ours, the use of one’s own mind is the best vaccine against the virus of lies. Thinking for yourself provides one guard against liars and possibly leads to facts and truth. One can only hope this is true.
John C. Morgan is an author and educator. He took the great books class years ago when a student at Albright College.
