1984 Foreword "fascistic disposition"

[Paul Nightingale]

Terrance wrote:

> 
> Assuming that you are correct that Pynchon is discussing precisely the
> kind of situation that has come about in the US after 9-11 and
assuming
> it is therefore reasonable to infer that Pynchon expects the reader to
> connect the dots, how do you explain the fact that P provides merely
two
> dots to connect? It seems to me that your idea of "a narrative" (well,
> we know it's not your idea but...) can be of some use here. Right?
> 
>
My understanding of narrative is that it treats as a text anything that
might be relevant to our understanding of a topic. So for the current
discussion, anything that was written at the time Orwell published his
novel provides useful context, anything contemporaneous with Pynchon's
writing also is relevant. But the text isn't just produced and left
there to be deciphered by the astute reader. Understanding the text is a
form of rewriting, which is why I cannot separate writing and reading.
They are not the same activity but nonetheless inseparable. No one can
write without reading (ie making sense of what they write). And no one
can read without (re)writing. What I bring, for example, to the passage
we've discussed include my own memories of 1984 when Thatcher turned
Britain into a police state and showed that, under no circumstances,
would the Labour Party and the trade union movement defend the striking
miners. (It goes without saying, of course, that the previous sentence
is my take on a period that others might describe differently.) And in
1984 I came to hate the sound of Orwell's name. Because everyone said he
was right, and it really was happening, this was 1984. Well OK. So what
happens next?

It was never quite so simple and it isn't now. And I honestly don't
think P. was interested in writing a Foreword in which he said it's
1984. Attacks on civil liberties have taken place, certainly. But
Chomsky and Michael Moore have had books in the best-sellers lists. I
don't know the numbers involved, what constitutes a best-seller, but
there's a market for dissent. We have a system in which dissent has a
place; the problem for the government, the ruling class, just plain
Them, is to keep it in its place. Because people aren't stupid. My
reading of Orwell, a man of great courage and commitment, is that he
thought, deep down, they were, so they could be manipulated. My reading
of P's take on Orwell is that he's not so sure. He appreciates the
importance of the battle going on, and that's what he's addressing in
the passage we've discussed. It might be only two dots, but they're like
the Tardis, there's an awful lot of stuff inside. And it is only one
page. I'm still waiting to read the complete Foreword, from start to
finish; when I do I'll be looking for a narrative.