1984 Foreword "fascistic disposition"

Paul Mackin paul.mackin at verizon.net
Wed Apr 30 11:20:33 CDT 2003


> > Now, those of fascistic disposition - or merely
> > those among us who remain all too ready to justify any
> > government action, whether right or wrong - will
> > immediately point out that this is prewar thinking,
> > and that the moment enemy bombs begin to fall on one's
> > homeland, altering the landscape and producing
> > casualties among friends and neighbors, all this sort
> > of thing, really, becomes irrelevant, if not indeed
> > subversive. With the homeland in danger, strong
> > leadership and effective measures become of the
> > essence, and if you want to call that fascism, very
> > well, call it whatever you please, no one is likely to
> > be listening, unless it's for the air raids to be over
> > and the all clear to sound.  But the unseemliness of
> > an argument - let alone a prophecy - in the heat of some
> > later emergency does not necessarily make it wrong.
> > One could certainly argue that Churchill's war cabinet
> > had behaved no differently than a fascist regime,
> > censoring news, controlling wages and prices,
> > restricting travel, subordinating civil liberties to
> > self-defined wartime necessity. (ix-x)

This paragraph was particularly problematic for me. In an effort to
understand what what I think Pynchon might have wanted to say I tried
rewriting certain sentences and phrases. The opening sentences seemed
particularly unclear so I redid them entirely . At the same time I
wanted to preserve completely intact the point he makes at the end about
Churchill's wartime government having certain resemblances to fascism.

So think of the following as being said by Pynchon:

Is it not true that the extreme government actions and restrictions on
freedom imposed by Big Brother--entirely unnecessary to the public good
and therefore completely wrong under normal circumstances--may
nevertheless become necessary in wartime. The moment enemy bombs begin
to fall on one's homeland, altering the landscape and producing
casualties among friends and neighbors, criticism of very harsh
government controls become irrelevant, if not indeed subversive. With
the homeland in danger, strong leadership and effective measures become
of the essence, and if you want to call that fascism, very well, call it
whatever you please, no one is likely to be listening, unless it's for
the air raids to be over and the all clear to sound.  But the
unseemliness of opposing harsh restrictions on freedom or talking about
the long term dangers of granting emergency powers in the heat of some
emergency does not necessarily make the fears of tyranny wrong.  One
could certainly argue that Churchill's war cabinet had behaved no differently
than a fascist regime, censoring news, controlling wages and prices,
restricting travel, subordinating civil liberties to self-defined wartime necessity. 







More information about the Pynchon-l mailing list