Specters of Totalitarianism: Representations of Power and Control in Twentieth Century Dystopian Fiction (English Dissertation)

Similarly, in Nineteen Eighty Four, the historical narrative of a nation is totally revised, in order to suit Oceania’s perspective. Although Oceania always seems to be at war with external enemies in the form of Eurasia and Eastasia, Orwell shows that the Party is always constantly changing its views on these, depending on which country it is fighting at the time as:

To trace out the history of the whole period, to realise who was fighting whom at any given moment, would have been utterly impossible, since no written record, and no spoken word, ever made any mention of any other alignment than the existing one.

Orwell is showing how the national histories of a country are being revised. The fact that there is no ‘written record’ (p.19) or ‘spoken word’ (p.19) on the country whom Oceania is fighting, except the one which it is currently allied with,  displays that the Party’s aim is to create a one-sided view of history, which by doing so, would be used to effectively counter opposition. Also at the same time, by eradicating written records of its’ enemy, and its own losses abroad, the Party is able to suppress any weaknesses or cracks within the fabrics of the Oceania’s infrastructure. By suppressing any weaknesses in the state’s internal fabric, the Party is able to create a myth, whereby the state is a bulwark against its foreign enemies, and ultimately a tower of strength amongst the masses at home. Furthermore, the Party re-writes the history of the nation by attempting to take the credit for other previous governments’ achievements, especially where the country’s military achievements are concerned as Winston suggests that ‘apparently the Party created aeroplanes.’ (p.38) Winston’s uncertainty on whom created ‘aeroplanes’ (p.38) is important because it demonstrates that he is only aware of the Party’s version of the facts.  As he is only aware of the Party’s version of the facts, he does not know whether these facts are actually true or not. By not knowing whether these facts are true or not, Winston’s uncertainty conforms to the ‘defamilarisation’ process,  that is characteristic of dystopian genre, whereby as a result of the futuristic setting that is  often present, memories of the past are confined to the dustbin of history.  

Orwell’s novels also demonstrate that dictatorships not only revise the histories of the nations in which they control, but also the histories of individuals. This revisionism of individual histories is seen in Nineteen Eighty Four,  when Orwell explains that:

People always disappeared, always during the night. Your name was removed from the registers, every record of everything you had ever done was wiped out, your one-time existence was doomed and then forgotten. You were demolished, annihilated: Vaporised was the usual word. (p.21)

Orwell demonstrates that the Party is able to re-write the histories of individuals. The fact that peoples’ names on the ‘registers’ (p.21), and achievements are wiped out, reveals the state’s ability to ensure that peoples’ lives are ‘vaporised’ (p.21).  It is symbolic that peoples’ lives are ‘vaporised’ (p.21) because by doing this, the Party is able to vanquish the person concerned, thereby ensuring that they never existed. By being able to vanquish the person, by imagining that they never existed, the Party in Oceania mirrors the activities of the NKVD (secret police) in the Soviet Union during the 1930s, whereby people were sent to Siberia, and never seen again. 

At the same time, through the re-writing of personal histories, the Party is able to suppress personal memories.  This suppression of personal memories is seen when Winston desperately tries to remember his own childhood memory of London:

He tried to squeeze out some childhood memory that should tell him, whether London had always been quite like this. Were there always these rotting nineteenth-century houses, their sides stored up with blocks of timber, their windows patched with cardboard and their roofs with corrugated iron, their crazy garden walls ranging in all directions? And the bombed sites where the bombs had cleared a larger patch and there had sprung up sordid wooden colonies of dwindling like chicken-houses? But it was no use – he could not remember; nothing remained of his childhood except a series of bright-light tableaux, occurring against no background and mostly unintelligible. (p.5)

Winston’s use of questions here is important because it demonstrates his struggle to regain his memory, and his struggle to regain control, as conveyed through language, as he tries to figure out whether the environment of London he is living in now is similar to that of the London in which he earlier grew up. The fact that ‘nothing remained of his own childhood’ (p.5) is important, as it demonstrates the Party’s ability to suppress the personal events that mattered to Winston before the revolution. As the Party is able to suppress life before the revolution, Orwell is demonstrating that dystopian regimes’ treat history like a clock, where only the political party in power can decide when a nation’s chronology can begin and finish. In this case, history only begins with the Party itself.

 However, Orwell’s novels also demonstrate that despite the attempts to re-write history in various ways, this is not always successful, as there is resistance to this to some extent. This resistance only serves to weaken the regimes from within.

Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty Four demonstrates that the Party’s official versions of national history are undermined. It is revealed throughout the novel that the Party is unable to fully control the past, as it appears that remnants of the past still survive. This is seen when Winston and Julia come across a glass paperweight in Mr Charrington’s junk shop. Mr Charrington reveals that ‘it’s a little chunk of history that they’ve forgotten to alter. It’s a message from a hundred years ago, if one knew how to read it.’ (p.252) The fact that the glass paper weight has been around since a ‘hundred years ago’ (p.252) is important because it symbolises an era before the Party and the revolution came about. It reveals that despite the Party’s mission to destroy the previous bourgeois, capitalist era , by replacing it with an innovative and industrially advanced society, fragments of the old era remain, which the Party has obviously ‘forgotten to alter’ (p.252). As fragments of the old era remain, this poses a challenge to the Party of Oceania, thereby revealing cracks in the fabric of the state. As a result of this, weaknesses are exposed, hence creating opportunities for Oceania’s possible future disintegration.

Orwell also shows that re-writing history is unsuccessful, as the regimes reveal limitations in controlling personal memories.  Orwell reveals in Animal Farm that Napoleon’s dictatorship has limitations in controlling personal memories. Unlike Winston in Nineteen Eighty Four, who remembers very little from his own childhood past or the pre- revolution era, the animals, such as Boxer and Jessie, clearly remember the events that happened before the revolution , and therefore have the knowledge and memory at hand to critique Napoleon’s dictatorship. Jessie and Boxer realise that Napoleon’s regime deters from Old Major’s original principles of Animalism, in the sense that not only are the principles such as ‘all animals are equal’ (p.44) subverted,  and replaced by sinister ones, such as ‘some animals are more equal than others’(p.133). However, certain revolutionary traditions, like the ‘Beasts of England’ (p.31) song, are also distorted. As the animals still remember the original principles of Animalism by end of the novel, their memories function as future weapons to overthrow the regime. This is important, as although Napoleon and his close-knit entourage of pigs still retain their monopoly of power till the end, there is a real anticipation that such megalomania could potentially be destroyed one day.  

Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty Four and Animal Farm show that whilst the Party in Oceania and the Pigs of Manor Farm are largely successful in re-writing history, in so far as moulding it to suit their respective political agendas, limitations and flaws in doing so, are also present. As a result, this highlights weaknesses, which undermine the respective states from within.

Chapter 2

‘BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU’ (George Orwell ). Representations of Terror and Surveillence as tools of control in George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty Four and Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale

Another method that dictatorships control their populations is through surveillance and terror. Surveillance could manifest itself through close inspection and security measures, whilst terror could be mediated through violence, detainment in concentration camps, torture, interrogation and show trials. However, whether this is successfully demonstrated in dystopian fiction, is controversial. George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty Four and Margaret Atwood’s A Handmaid’s Tale demonstrate that whilst surveillance and terror definitely appear to hold a strong influence over the populations represented in the novels, there is still some element of resistance that is apparent. These two themes will be given equal treatment in this chapter: the first section dealing with surveillance, whilst the second section dealing with terror. Whilst there are similarities in the ways in which both novels mediate surveillance and terror, there are also major differences.

Orwell and Atwood’s novels show that surveillance is used as a security measure to observe its citizens. Whilst in Orwell’s novel, this is carried out by the thought police, the posters of Big Brother and the telescreens, this is carried out by the aunts in Atwood’s novel.

Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty Four demonstrates that surveillance is wielded by the Thought Police. The Thought Police are an extension of the Party of Oceania, and therefore it is their role to keep the population in check by controlling and infiltrating their thoughts and feelings.  This infiltration of thoughts and feelings is often seen through the eyes of Winston, who explains his fears of going through every-day life being constantly watched.  As Erika Gottilieb notes:

 Winston develops a growing uneasiness as he observes the Party’s incessant vigilance: the ever-watching eyes of Big Brother on the posters, the helicopters snooping through the windows, the omnipresence of the Thought Police, and the telescreen in the very centre of his apartment.

Gottilieb’s assertion that the Party is a constant presence in the lives of Oceania’s citizens is correct, as the main aim of the Party’s surveillance is to both infiltrate and control the populations’ thoughts and feelings.  This infiltration and control of the populations’ thoughts and feelings is particularly seen, when Winston finds a diary to note his thoughts. Orwell suggests that:

Whether he wrote DOWN WITH BIG BROTHER, or whether he refrained from writing it, made no difference. Whether he went on with the diary, or whether he did not go on with it, made no difference. The Thought Police would get him just the same. He had committed  - would still have committed, even if he had never set pen to paper – the essential crime that contains all others in itself. Thought crime, they called it. Thought crime was not a thing that could be concealed for ever. You might dodge successfully for a while, even for years, but sooner or later, they were bound to get you. (p.21)

The passage here demonstrates the infiltrative role of the Thought Police, which is to monitor ‘thought crime’. (p.24) Winston is to be kept in check psychologically to ensure that his feelings and ideas are in accordance with the party line. The fact that ‘whether he went on with the diary, or whether he did not go on with it, made no difference’ (p.24) is important, as it demonstrates that the Thought Police are always two steps ahead of the population. The fact that they are always two steps ahead of the population demonstrates that they are an invincible and omniscient presence within society. As a result of being an omniscient and invincible presence in society, they are able to erode civic values, such as independence, freedom of speech, and the press.

 Surveillance in Orwell’s novel is also mediated through the telescreen, which forms a focal device of Oceania’s infrastructure. Orwell explains that:

The telecreen received and transmitted simultaneously. Any sound that Winston made above the level of a very low whisper, would be picked up by it;  moreover so long as he remained within the field of vision which the metal plaque commanded, he could be seen as well as heard.  There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment.  How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork. It was even conceivable that they watched everybody all the time. But at any rate they could plug in your wire whenever they wanted to. You had to live- did live, from habit that became instinct- in the assumption from every sound you made was overheard, and except in darkness, every movement scrutinised.  (p.5)

Orwell demonstrates that surveillance is carried out by the telescreen. The fact that the telescreen continuously and ‘received and transmitted simultaneously’ (p.5) is important in picking up on the citizen’s whereabouts. The fact that any noise Winston said ‘above the level of a very low whisper, would be picked up’ (p.5) demonstrates that even whispering, let alone talking, is forbidden, and is considered an illegal activity. It is important that talking and whispering is an illegal activity because it demonstrates that the citizens of Oceania are unable to express their inner thoughts and feelings. By being unable to express their inner-thoughts and feelings, Winston and his fellow citizens find that their identities are stripped away from them. As a result of their identity being stripped away from them, they become invalids, and thus are deemed to be worthless.  Similarly , the fact that Winston’s movements are ‘scrutinised’ (p.5) demonstrates the technological nature of the regime, as it reveals that the regime analyses everything. By analysing everything, thereby paying close attention to detail, the regime is easily able to protect itself. As a result of being able to protect itself, any illegal or criminal activity, carried out by the citizens of Oceania, is quickly eradicated.  

Furthermore, the Thought Police carry out surveillance by bugging walls and room devices like the ‘wires’ (p.5) . The fact that the Thought Police could ‘plug in your wire whenever they wanted to’(p.5) is important in revealing that no-one is safe from the regime. Winston’s suggestion that you had to live ‘in the assumption that every sound you made was overheard’ (p.5) is important because it exhibits the regime’s ability to effectively penetrate the psyche of its citizens. As the regime effectively penetrates the psyche of its citizens, the citizens of Oceania are forced to change their behaviour, and conduct their everyday lives in a regimented manner. It is important that Oceania’s citizens are required to conduct their lives in a regimented manner, as it demonstrates that they become social recluses. As a result of this, they become fixtures of the Party.  

Surveillance in Orwell’s novel is also mediated through the posters of Big Brother.  Orwell explains that:

The hypnotic eyes gazed into Winston’s own. It was as though some huge force were pressing down upon you, something that penetrated inside your skull, battering against your brain, frightening you out of your beliefs, persuading you to almost to deny the evidence of your senses. (p.83)

Orwell demonstrates here the Party’s use of surveillance, through the posters of Big Brother.  His suggestion that Big Brother’s eyes were ‘hypnotic’ (p.83) is important , as it demonstrates the Party’s skill in manipulating its citizens.  By manipulating its citizens, the Party is able to mould each individual to suits its purposes and outlook. Furthermore, the fact that Big Brother’s picture is depicted as a ‘huge force pressing down upon you’ (p.83) and ‘something that penetrated inside your skull, battering against your brain’ (p.83)  is important in demonstrating the all-powerful impact that Big Brother has on the everyday lives of Oceania’s citizens. His suggestion that this image ‘penetrated your skull’  (p.83) and “battered against your brain” (p.83) demonstrates that regardless of whether he is sleeping or awake, Winston and other citizens are not safe from the Party’s grasp.  As Winston and his fellow citizens are not safe from the Party’s grasp, the Party is effectively able to subordinate its citizens to mental servitude. By subordinating its citizens to mental servitude, thereby ‘frightening them out of their beliefs’ (p.83), the Party maintains total control over its citizens’ behaviour. As a result, any resistance attempts are instantly quashed. 

Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale also reveals that the regimes in dystopian fiction, carry out surveillance, by the way that everything and everyone in The Republic of Gilead is closely monitored. As Keith Booker notes, ‘Gilead is a police state, with the movements and activities of its citizens closely monitored and watched.’ Booker’s assertion that Gilead is represented as a police state, whereby everything is closely monitored is correct, as this is immediately seen as the start of the novel by the way that the aunts in the red centre watch over the handmaids. Offred explains that Aunt Sara and Aunt Elizabeth ‘patrolled’ (p.14), carrying ‘electric cattle prods’ (p.14).  Offred’s suggestion that the aunts ‘patrolled’ (p.14) rather than walked is important because it demonstrates that the aunts’ major role is to facilitate the regime’s security apparatus. By facilitating the regime’s security apparatus, the aunts effectively monitor the girls’ movements continuously, in order to spot signs of illegal activity. As a result of this, resistance is futile, and therefore forbidden. Similarly, as the aunts electrocute the women with their ‘electric cattle prods’ (p.14), the women live in fear of being harmed. As result of this, they are more likely to owe obedience to the aunts.  

At the same time, Atwood and Orwell also reveal that alongside surveillance, the regimes in their novels control their populations through terror. Whilst the Gilead regime in Atwood’s novel terrorises its citizens through public humiliation, show trials, and in concentration camps, the Oceania regime in Orwell’s novel terrorises its population through interrogation and torture.

Atwood’s novel shows that the Gilead regime terrorises its population through public humiliation and show trials. The Gilead regime publicly humiliates its citizens by the way that earlier on in the novel, the aunts carry out a ‘particution’ (p.139), whereby the handmaids are forced to instil hatred and blame for the victim concerned. As Heidi Macpherson notes, ‘the particution is a participatory execution of apparent criminals, a way of re-enforcing the behaviour of a crowd and also a vent for the frustration and enforced positivity.’ Macpherson’s assertion that a ‘particution’ (p.139) is used as a voluntary type of execution, in order to air frustrations about society , is particularly substantiated in Atwood’s novel, as this is seen by the handmaids’ humiliation of Janine. As a result of her rape, Janine is berated by the other handmaids, who tell her that it is ‘her fault’ (p.139) and that she is a ‘whore’ (p.139).  The fact that the women chant that she is ‘whore’ (p.139) and that the rape she suffered was ‘her fault’ (p.139) is important, as it not only re-enforces the patriarchal ideology of the regime, whereby women hold an inferior status to men. However, it also ensures that she becomes a repentant citizen, who is ‘broken’ (p.139) by the repressive policies of the state.  By being ‘broken’ (p.139) she becomes totally subordinate to the regime, and therefore is unlikely to be a rebellious force within society. By failing to be a rebellious force within society, Janine mirrors Arendt’s view of totalitarian societies, whereby ‘opposition is effectively removed’. 

The Gilead Regime also uses concentration camps to terrorise its population. This is seen by the way that the Republic of Gilead sends both its non-conformant female citizens to the ‘colonies’ (p.20)  where they not only have to spend eternity clearing ‘toxic waste’ (p.20), but are also deemed to be viewed as ‘unwomen’ (p.20) from this point onwards. By being sent to the ‘colonies’(p.20), the women are converted from being citizens of Gilead, to slaves. As a result of becoming slaves, the women become oppressed. Furthermore, Offred’s account that women sent to these places are deemed to be ‘unwomen’ (p.20) ,is important, as it demonstrates that rather than being loyal and obedient citizens of Gilead, the women now become outsiders, and Gilead’s enemies. By becoming Gilead’s enemies, the women experience a loss of identity. As a result of experiencing a loss of identity, the women become non-existent within society. Therefore, like the regime’s aims to re-write the history of America, individuals also vanish without a trace. 

Orwell’s novel also demonstrates that the Party terrorises its population. The Party terrorises its population through the use of interrogation and torture. Although Hannah Arendt argues that ‘concentration camps are the most crucial terroristic method used for total domination’, this is not exactly substantiated in Orwell’s novel, as Orwell reveals that the Oceania regime could just as successfully dominate its population,  by using torture and interrogation. The Oceania regime uses torture and interrogation, as this is seen during the confrontation between O’Brien and Winston in Room 101. By using a combination of interrogation and torture, O’Brien exposes Winston as nothing more than ‘a bag of filth’ (p.276) , to which the former forces the latter to convert to the Party’s principles. As a result of O’Brien’s coercion in converting Winston to the Party’s principles, Winston is effectively broken to the point that by the novel’s climax, ‘he loved Big Brother’. (p.310)

However, although the respective regimes in the novels of Orwell and Atwood are able to successfully carry out its techniques of surveillance and terror to a large extent, there are also times when this is ineffective, as various characters prove resistant to them. This is seen particularly more so in Atwood’s novel, than Orwell’s novel. Atwood demonstrates that her characters resist surveillance measures, as this is seen by the way that Offred and the Commander are able to visit the ‘Jezebels’ (p.250) without being caught. It is important that Offred and the Commander are able to visit the ‘Jezebels’ without being caught , as it demonstrates that Gilead’s surveillance measures, embodied by the ‘eyes’ (p.217) and the ‘guardians’ (p.307) , are not always efficient. By not being efficient, the regime is vulnerable to threats or invasions. As the regime is vulnerable to threats and invasions, it is therefore hardly surprising that Offred is not only able to conduct a love affair with the Commander’s servant Nick, but is also able to escape at the end of novel. By escaping at the end of the novel, Offred is able to leave the ‘darkness’ (p.307) of Gilead behind her, and ‘walk into the light’ (p.307) of the real world.

Orwell and Atwood demonstrate in their novels that another method that dictatorships use to control their populations is surveillance and terror. Whilst these methods prove to be successful to a large extent in both novels, they are also unsuccessful to a small extent. This is because these methods do not always fulfil their roles in ensuring total conformity and obedience. As a result, resistance is still present.  

Chapter 3

‘Winning Hearts and Minds?’ Representations of Indoctrination and Propaganda as a tools of control in Dystopian Fiction

Another way that dictatorships in dystopian fiction exercise control over its citizens , is through indoctrination and propaganda. Indoctrination is defined as a method used by dictatorships to inculcate values and doctrines into the hearts of its citizens. On the other hand, propaganda is defined as a ‘form of manipulation and lies to persuade someone to hold a certain negative or positive belief’. Indoctrination and Propaganda can manifest themselves in different ways. Whilst Indoctrination is carried out through the manipulation of youth and a dissemination of culture and incentives, propaganda is mediated through personality cults and the manipulation of language. However, whether the regimes portrayed in dystopian novels are successfully able to use indoctrination and propaganda to subordinate its citizens, is controversial. George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty Four and Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World demonstrate that whilst the regimes in their novels are able to successfully manipulate its everyday citizens with indoctrination and propaganda to a certain extent, they also reveal that this indoctrination and propaganda has limits.

George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty Four reveals that indoctrination is used as tool of the Party in Oceania to control its citizens, by the way it manipulates Oceania’s youth. The youth of Oceania are manipulated by the way that they become spies for the Party. This is seen when Winston visits Mrs Parsons and is shocked by the behaviour of her children, as he explains that:

Nearly all children nowadays were horrible. What was worse of all was that by means of such organisations as the spies they were systematically turned into ungovernable little savages, and yet this produced in them no tendency whatever to rebel against the discipline of the Party. On the contrary, they adored the Party and everything connected with it. The songs, the processions, the banners, the hiking, the drilling with dummy rifles, the yelling of slogans, the worship of Big Brother- it was a sort of glorious game to them. All their ferocity was turned outwards, against the enemies of the state, against foreigners, traitors, saboteurs, thought-criminals. It was almost normal for people over thirty to be frightened of their own children. And with good reason, for hardly a week passed in which The Times did not carry a paragraph describing how some eavesdropping little sneak- ‘child-hero’ was the phase generally used- had overheard some compromising remark and denounced his parents to the Thought Police. (pp. 26-27)

Orwell demonstrates that the Party is able to able to indoctrinate children, by persuading them to enrol as spies. Winston’s suggestion that the Party turns children into ‘ungovernable little savages’ (p.26) is important because his description that they are ‘ungovernable’ (p.26) demonstrates the Party’s  ability to emotionally manipulate children, from becoming innocent to barbaric. By becoming barbaric, the children are forced to disobey the rules and good manners that were instilled in them from their parents, thereby making it their duty to instead ‘denounce’ (p.26) their parents.  By making it their duty to ‘denounce’ (p.27) their parents, Oceania not only mirrors Arendt’s view that totalitarian regimes recruit ordinary citizens to take up roles in espionage services to serve the state. However, it also mirrors the role played by the Gestapo in Nazi Germany, whom recruited police informers to spy on their neighbours. Therefore, the children, by becoming spies, actually become an extension of the state police apparatus, as they become agents of terror themselves. Furthermore, the fact that most children ‘adored the Party’ (p.26) whilst the odd child became a ‘child hero’ (p.27) is important in demonstrating the children’s’ loyalty to the state. It is important that children ‘adored the Party’ (p.26) because ‘adored’ (p.26) demonstrates the children are completely in love with the Party. As the children prove to be completely in love with the Party, they are effectively subordinate to it. Also as some children were in the newspapers willing to becoming a ‘child-hero’ (p.27), this demonstrates that the children believe that ‘Big Brother’ is an inspirational icon and ‘saviour’ (p.19) to them, whereby being in awe of his qualities, want to prove themselves to be an asset, and follow in his footsteps. As a result of this, they are able to carry on the legacy of Oceania.

Orwell’s novel also demonstrates that the Party uses propaganda as method to control the population, as this is seen through the Party’s use of a personality cult and leader worship. The Party uses a personality cult, surrounding ‘Big Brother’, which is embodied by the posters on the wall. Big Brother is regarded as a ‘saviour’ (p.20), who has been at the forefront of the revolution since its earliest days. The fact that he is regarded as the ‘saviour’ (p.20)is important , as it demonstrates his role as the benevolent guardian of the nation. By being a benevolent guardian of the nation, he ‘towers upon high’ (p.20), in order to protect it from external threats. By protecting the nation from external threats, he is deemed to be ‘god-like figure’, someone whom the citizens of Oceania have a huge respect and admiration for. This admiration of ‘Big Brother’ is further manifested in the power-worship that takes place at the start of the novel, when the citizens of Oceania chant ‘BB’ (p.18). Winston describes this chanting of ‘BB’ (p.18) as ‘partly a sort of hymn to the wisdom and majesty of Big Brother’ (p.18), and partly   ‘an act of self-hypnosis, a deliberate drowning of consciousness by means of rhythmic noise.’ (pp.18-19) Winston’s suggestion that it was a type of ‘hymn to the wisdom and majesty of Big Brother’ (p.18)  is important, as it demonstrates that Big Brother is treated like a religious figure. By being treated like a religious figure, he is idolised as the sole guardian of the nation. As a result of being the sole guardian of the nation, he represents a supreme presence in the lives Oceania’s citizens. Furthermore, at the same time, Winston’s description that the chant was a form of ‘self-hypnosis’ (p.18) is important because like indoctrination, the citizens are forced to convince themselves of the Party’s doctrines and beliefs. By convincing themselves of the Party’s doctrines and beliefs, they know nothing else apart from this, as only the Party’s doctrines pre-occupy their ‘consciousness’ (p.19). As a result of this, they become ignorant of reality.  Similarly, Huxley’s World State uses a personality cult. This personality cult is seen by the way the citizens of the World State worship Henry Ford, whom is the inspiration and model for the regime. The World State citizens refer to Henry Ford as ‘Our Ford’ (p.33). It is important that they refer to him in this way because likewise with Big Brother in Orwell’s novel, the citizens of the World State feel they have someone to associate themselves with. By having someone to associate themselves with, the citizens of World State form one collective identity. As a result of this, there is no room for spontaneity.

Orwell’s novel also reveals that propaganda is mediated through the manipulation of language. As Alok Rei notes, ‘Language is one of the key instruments of political domination, the necessary and insidious means of ‘totalitarian’ control of reality.’ Rei’s assertion that language is a major tool of propaganda to ensure total control of populations is particularly substantiated in Orwell’s novel, as this language control embodies itself in the form of ‘Newspeak’ (p.84). Newspeak is the official language of Oceania, which has replaced ‘Oldspeak’(p.84).  Newspeak is different from ‘Oldspeak’ (p.84). Whilst the latter contains a range of complex verbs and adjectives in the English language, the former through the ‘destruction of words’ (p.84) , cuts the ‘language down to the bone’ (p.84), and therefore uses simplistic words such as ‘doublethink’(p.84) and ‘ingsoc’(p.84), in order to ‘narrow the range of thought’(p.84). By being able to narrow the range of thought, the Party is able to remove liberal or threatening ideas. By removing liberal or threatening ideas, the Party exercises total mastery over language by selecting words carefully. By selecting words carefully, the Party would ensure that ‘thought crime’ (p.84) becomes defunct, as there would not be ‘anymore words left to express it’(p.84).  As a result of this, resistance is futile.  

Huxley’s Brave New World also demonstrates that dictatorships in dystopian fiction use indoctrination as a tool of control, as this is seen by the way the World State disseminates incentives.  The World State disseminates incentives, as this is seen by its provision of hallucinatory drugs, in the form of soma. Soma proves to be a particularly useful way for the World State to indoctrinate its citizens, as it provides them with feelings of superficial happiness. As Brad Buchanan notes:

The inhabitants of Brave New World take soma namely to escape from unpleasant situations and from real life. It produces only shallow feelings of well-being and no real happiness or fulfilment, and it distracts from any human effort or true mentality. In brief, soma promotes a superficial hedonism and causes alienation from the kind of ‘real human life’, that we know. 

Buchanan makes a strong argument because soma is used as a way of giving the citizens of the regime a sense of happiness, whilst at the same time allowing them to escape from bad situations. This combination of escapism and happiness that soma entails, is particularly seen when the World Controller Mustapha Mond explains to both Bernard Marx and John the Savage that it has ‘all the advantages of Christianity and alcohol’ (p.46) , but ‘none of their defects’ (p.46). Mond’s suggestion that Soma has all the ‘advantages’ (p.46) of these attributes, rather than their ‘defects’ (p.46 demonstrates that despite being happy, the citizens of Oceania are always held captive in a dream-like state by the regime. By being held captive in a dream-like state, soma is used to show the citizens of World State only one side of life, and not the other. As a result of this, they are dangerously isolated from the real world.  

Another way that Huxley’s novel demonstrates indoctrination is through conditioning, in the form of ‘hypnopaedia’, or sleep-teaching. This is particularly seen by the way that at the start of the novel, the Director of the Hatchery instils in the Bokanovsky embryos, a hatred of literature and culture by making them simultaneously experience pain. He explains that:

Books and loud noises, flowers and electric shocks, already in their minds, these couples were compromisingly linked; and after two hundred repetitions of the same or similar lesson would be wedded indissolubility. What man has joined, nature is powerless to put asunder. They’ll grow up with what psychologists used to call an ‘instinctictive’ hatred of books and flowers.’ Reflexes inevitably conditioned. They’ll be safe from books and botany all their lives. 

The Director’s suggestion that ‘books and loud noises’ (p.46) and ‘flowers and electric shocks’ (p.46) were interchangeably linked, reveals that when future embryos read ‘books’ (p.46) in the future, they will be faced with a barrier. They are faced with a barrier because rather than developing a sense of enjoyment of ‘books’ (p.46), they will experience pain and develop a ‘hatred’ (p.46) for them instead. By experiencing pain, the fear of this will automatically ensure that the embryos conform to the regime’s beliefs and doctrines, which will be ingrained in their minds. As a result of the embryos experiencing pain to ensure conformity, this draws on Arendt’s view that ‘propaganda and terror are two sides of the same coin’, whereby both methods are used alongside each other in totalitarian societies. Therefore, in this case, conditioning only proves to be an extension of the state terror apparatus. 

However, although Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty Four and Huxley’s Brave New World demonstrate that their regimes’ methods of indoctrination and propaganda are largely successful, they also reveal that there are limitations to this. Although indoctrination is used mainly in the novels’ to suppress individuality and freedom, this proves ineffectual in some cases. Orwell demonstrates that the Party’s suppression of individuality is unsuccessful, as this is seen when Julia explains to Winston that:

I’m going to get hold of a real woman’s frock from somewhere and wear it instead of these bloody trousers. I’ll wear silk stockings and high heeled shoes! In this room, I’m going to be a woman, not a party comrade. (p.149)

Orwell demonstrates the Party’s inability to suppress individuality, as Julia wants to express her sexuality. Julia’s suggestion that she wants to become a ‘woman’ (p.149) rather than a ‘party comrade’ (p.149) is important because her identification as a ‘woman’ (p.149) demonstrates that she wants to assert her real identity and become a real person, rather than a microcosm of the Party. By wanting to become a real person rather than a microcosm, she refuses to be inferior to the Party’s beliefs and doctrines. By refusing to be inferior to the Party’s beliefs and doctrines, thereby being ‘corrupt to the bone’ (p.149), she proves to be a rebellious force within society. As a result of this, she is a potential threat to Oceania’s stability. Similarly, Huxley’s World State also reveals limits in suppressing individuality. This is seen by the way that John ‘The Savage’ wants to experience the commodities that would constitute ‘high art’ (p.210), such as literature, music and philosophy. John expresses his wishes to Mustapha Mond during his trial that ‘I want God. I want poetry. I want love. I want freedom. I want goodness.’ (p.211) It is important that John would like these things because it demonstrates that he wants to express his own identity, rather than take for granted the World State’s ethos that ‘everyone belongs to everyone else.’ (p.211)  By wanting to express his identity , thereby taking refuge in the ‘old’ (p.211) things like religion, literature, relationships and innocence, John develops the power to challenge the World State. By challenging the World State, he is able to unveil the regime’s flaws and corrupt nature. As a result of this, the regime could potentially disintegrate.  

At the same time, both novels also demonstrate that their regimes’ propaganda attempts are unsuccessful, as certain characters are able to see through their respective regime’s lies and persuasion. Orwell demonstrates that Winston is able to see through the lies of the Party, when he discusses the origins of Big Brother and the Party. Although the population are led to believe that the ‘Party had invented aeroplanes’ (p.38), Winston reveals that ‘he remembered aeroplanes since his earliest childhood’. (p.38) This is important in demonstrating the weaknesses of the propaganda, as it shows the facts the Party puts forward, are false. By highlighting these false facts, Winston exposes the regime’s flaws. As a result of Winston’s exposure of the regime’s flaws, Big Brother’s reputation as the ‘saviour’ (p.18) of the state would be effectively undermined.  

Orwell and Huxley demonstrate in their respective novels that another method dictatorships use to control its citizens’ is propaganda and indoctrination. Whist these methods prove to be successful in wielding control over the population, they also prove to be rather superficial in some occasions, as the populations concerned can see right through them.  

Conclusion

Dystopian fiction has always been characterised by power and control. One of the main reasons authors write in this genre is to provide a warning for the future generations, in order to create an awareness of how power can be manipulated by governments and small elites, to serve their own gains, at the expense of the majority. This dissertation aimed to look at the ways in which this power and control has been represented and exercised by dictatorships. These ways embodied themselves in the form of: re-writing history, surveillance and terror, and indoctrination and propaganda. The first chapter used George Orwell’s Animal Farm and Nineteen Eighty Four as its basis to discuss the ways in which the regimes in power, the pigs of Manor Farm in the former, and the Party of Oceania in the latter, were able to re-write history. Both texts have shown that their respective regimes’ have not only been able to manipulate truth, but have also up-held the official memories of the state, at the expense of unofficial memories. The second chapter, using Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty Four and Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale, looked at ways in which the Oceania and Gilead regimes use surveillance and terror, in order to keep their populations in check. Similarly, the third chapter, using Orwell’s novel alongside Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, discussed the ways in which Oceania and the World State, used indoctrination and propaganda to exercise control. Whilst all these methods are used effectively by dictatorships to control populations, they also prove to have their limits. If there is any method that the regimes most successfully use to wield control over its citizens, it is surveillance and terror. This is because unlike the other two methods, surveillance and terror enables dictatorships to break its citizens, thereby ensuring complete conformity and obedience. At the same time, through these methods of control, this dissertation has shed light on the concept of totalitarianism, and the extent to which Manor Farm, Oceania and Gilead, can be considered to be ‘totalitarian regimes’. Although Arendt defined totalitarianism as ‘a political system which ensured total domination over all political, social and economic life’, her ideas of total domination are not totally substantiated in all the novels discussed, as some novels display more resistance than others. Out of three different regimes portrayed in the novels, Gilead is proven  to be the regime where Arendt’s ideas of total domination are less substantiated, whereas, Oceania and Manor Farm are proven to be the regimes’ where Arendt’s views are most substantiated. The Gilead regime proves to be the regime that is less ‘totalitarian’ because despite its control over the population through surveillance and terror,  Offred, and her secret lover Nick, by enrolling in the Mayday resistance organisation, are able to escape, leaving Gilead to disintegrate. On the other hand, Oceania and Manor Farm prove to be the most ‘totalitarian’ regimes. Whilst by the end of Nineteen Eighty-Four, Winston is effectively broken and converted to the Party’s cause by O’Brien, by the end of Animal Farm, the Pigs rule supreme over the other  animals and have replaced the farm’s former owner, thus unveiling a betrayal of the revolution, thereby installing a dictatorship, promoting oppression and inequality. It is this oppression and inequality that writers of dystopian fiction critiqued and warned their readers against, in order to prevent cruelty from happening again, in the contemporary world. 

Word Count: 8,465 words

Bibliography

Primary Texts

Atwood, Margaret, The Handmaid’s Tale (London: Jonathan Cape Ltd, 1986)

Huxley, Aldous (eds.), Brave New World (London: Vintage, 2004)

Orwell, George, Animal Farm: A Fairy Story (London: Secker and Warburg, 1944)

Orwell, George (eds.), Nineteen Eighty Four (London: Penguin, 1990)

Secondary Texts

Arendt, Hannah (eds.), The Origins of Totalitarianism (New York: Harcourt and Brace Publishing, 1958)

Baccolini, Raffaele, and Tom Moylan (eds.), Dark Horizons: Science Fiction and the Dystopian Imagination (London: Routledge, 2003)

Booker, M.K , Dystopian Literature: A Theory and Research Guide (London: Greenwood Press, 1994)

Booker, M.K, The Dystopian Impulse in Modern Literature: Fiction as Social Criticism (London: Greenwood Press, 1994)

Booker, M.K, ‘English Dystopian Satire in Context’, in A Cambridge Companion to the British and Irish Novel 1945-2000 ed. Brian W. Shaffer (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2005), pp.32-45

Brannigan, John, Orwell to the Present: Literature in England 1945-2000 (Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2003)  

Buchanan, Brad, ‘Oedipus in Dystopia: Freud and Lawrence’, in  Aldous Huxley (Critical Editions) ed. Harold Bloom (New York: Infobase Publishing, 2010), pp. 103-123

Bunds, Phillip, Orwell and Marxism: The Political and Cultural Thinking of George Orwell (London: I.B Tauris, 2009)

Burnett, G.Wesley and Lucy Rollin,  ‘Anti-Leisure in Dystopian Fiction: The literature of leisure in the world of all possible worlds’, Leisure Studies, 19, (2000), 77-90

Calder, Jenni, Huxley’s Brave New World and Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four (London: Edward Arnold, 1976)

Cloeys, Gregory, ‘The Origins of Dystopia: Wells, Huxley and Orwell’, in The Cambridge Companion to Utopian Fiction ed. Gregory Claeys (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010), pp.107-120

Crick, Bernard,  George Orwell: A Life (London: Secker and Warburg, 1980)

Crick, Bernard, ‘Nineteen Eighty Four: Context and Controversy’, in  A Cambridge Companion to George Orwell ed. John Rodden (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007) pp. 142-168

Davison, Peter, George Orwell: A Literary Life (Hampshire, MacMillan, 1996)

Enroth, Clyde, ‘Mysticism in Two of Aldous Huxley’s Early Novels’, in Aldous Huxley (Critical Editions) ed. Harold Bloom (New York: Infobase Publishing, 2010), pp. 200-220

Gottileib, Erika, Dystopian Fiction East and West: Universe of Terror and Trial (London: McGill University Press, 2001)

Gottileib, Erika, ‘George Orwell’s Dystopias: Animal Farm and Nineteen Eighty Four’, A Cambridge Companion to the British and Irish Novel 1945-2000 ed. Brian W. Shaffer (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2005), pp.241-55

Greenblatt, Stephen et al. Norton Anthology of English Literature: The Twentieth Century and after (Vol.F) (New York: W.W Norton and Co, 2006)

Greenblatt, Stephen J., ‘Orwell as Satirist’, in George Orwell: A Collection of Critical Essays ed. Raymond Williams (London: Englewood Cliffs, 1974)  pp.104-115

Hammond, Andrew, ‘The Twilight of Utopia : British Dystopian Fiction and the Cold War’, The Modern Language Review, 106, (2011), 662-681

Hammond, J.R, A George Orwell Companion: A Guide to Novels, Documentaries and Essays (London: MacMillan, 1952)

Howells, Carol Ann, ‘Margaret Atwood’s dystopian visions: The Handmaid’s Tale and Oryx and Crake’, in The Cambridge Companion to Margaret Atwood ed. Carol Ann Howells (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006) pp.161-174

Ingle, Stephen, George Orwell: A Political Life (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1993)

Macpherson, Heidi, A Cambridge Introduction to Margaret Atwood (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010)

Malek, Amin, ‘Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale and the Dystopian Tradition’, Canadian Literature, 212, (1987) 9-16

Matter, William, ‘On Brave New World’, in No Place Else: Explorations in Utopian and Dystopian Fiction (eds.) Eric. S., Rabkin, Martin W. Greenberg, and Joseph P. Olander (Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1983), pp.94-110  

Mazower, Mark, Dark Continent: Europe’s Twentieth Century, (London: Penguin, 1998)

McKay, George, ‘Metapropaganda: Self-Reading Dystopian Fiction: Burdekin’s Swastika Night and Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty Four’, Science Fiction Studies, 21, (1994) 302-314

Numan, Shirley, ‘Just a Backlash: Margaret Atwood, Feminism and The Handmaid’s Tale’, University of Toronto Quarterly, 78, (2006) ,857-868

Rei, Alok, Orwell and the Politics of Despair: A Critical Study of the Writings of George Orwell (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988)

Rodden, John,  The Politics of Literary Reputation: The Making and Claiming of George Orwell (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989)

Schermer, Maartjen N, ‘Brave New World versus Island – Utopian and Dystopian Views on Psychopharmacology’, in in Aldous Huxley (Critical Editions) ed. Harold Bloom (New York: Infobase Publishing, 2010), pp. 147-163

Shaw, Tony, ‘Some Writers are more equal than others:  George Orwell, the State and the Cold War Privilege’, Cold War History, 4, (2003) ,140-162

Woiak, Joanne, ‘Designing a Brave New World: Eugenics, Politics and Fiction’, in Aldous Huxley (Critical Editions) ed. Harold Bloom (New York: InfoBase Publishing, 2010), pp. 163-191

---