Orwell accounts the whole sordid mess in the wondrous Homage to Catalonia, one of the best first-hand accounts of the Spanish Civil War. For those interested, this is the war that, if the powers in Britain, France, and the U.S. had gotten involved in it, would have prevented World War II, because it would have crippled Hitler's and Mussolini's war machines before they even got built. As it was, it provided a perfect training ground for them to prepare for the invasion of Poland and France three years later.
It was during World War Two that Orwell started to write his column As I Please. As the title suggests he was given carte blanche to write about anything and everything with no suppression of his opinion.
Whether it was criticism of the Soviet Union, or the behaviour of American soldiers in London, reviews of books, or observations about daily life during the war, they are fascinating to read for the picture generated of a very specific time in history. The work during that period is the forerunner of the modern columnist in style and format. Wide ranging, provocative, and thought-inspiring, they were what are attempted with various degrees of success today by anybody writing an op-ed piece.
What separated and continues to separate Orwell from the rest of the pack was his breadth of knowledge and experience. Few people alive now can hope to match in a life-time what he had achieved to that point: Served as police man in Burma, fought in Spain, lived as a down-and-out with the working poor to better document their lives for a book, worked as an interviewer for the BBC, and published three novels, The Road to Wiggen Pier, Keep the Aspidistra Flying, and Down and out in London and Paris
A life such as that could not help but formulate an innate sense of social justice. His exposure to the poor, colonial oppressed, and people willing to die for their freedom ensured that he would always speak out against inequity no matter whose feathers he ruffled. Remarkably, no matter what he said his work was never censored, widely-criticized maybe, but always printed.
What he would have thought of the quality of our press currently, their willingness to censor themselves by being embedded and hand-fed pool reports, is easy enough to guess. One only need look at the disdain he held for the "jingoists" who simply parroted government statements as gospel without question and called it news, to fathom the contempt he would have held current standards of reportage.
Article comments
1 - Leoniceno
Excellent article, gypsyman, keep up the good work.
2 - Tan The Man
Orwell's books are very important right now.
3 - Pam Avoledo
1984 is my favorite book. It's one of those books that changes your life.
Sometimes in the bookstore, I just pick up the book to read the ending: it's powerful.
While reading certain articles about subcultures in the United States, I often see the Big Brother aspects in them.
4 - alpha
Orwell had a prophetic imagination even though I am afraid the world is becoming in danger of being even worse than he imagined. But I like the comparison with bloggers who are still, for the moment, allowed to write what they wish.
Besides 1984, a classic never to be missed by anyone, Down and Out in Paris and London was once a favorite as a guide when I was down and out in Berkeley, New York and Woodstock. But I,sadly, wasn't the genius that Orwell was.
The other work that is fascinating and shouldn't be forgotten is Homage to Catalonia; his stories and memoirs of the Spanish Civil War where he put his life on the line for his belief in the fight against Fascism
.
Successful post, Gypsyman. I see some works I never noticed before that beg reading.
5 - Nick Jones
I second the praise for Homage to Catalonia. An interesting inside look at a little explored conflict of the twentieth century, especially the politics within the groups fighting Franco - including the Stalinist Communist's btrayal of the Anarchist group (POUM) orwell belonged to.
6 - Nick Jones
Oh dear, guess I should have read the whole article first.
7 - Carl
Can't believe someone actually mentioned Keep the Aspidistra Flying! It's worth checking out, for those who haven't read. Very funny - and an inspiration for my own writing (http://improvingthomas.com).
8 - Dan Clore
All in all a good read, but I have a couple factual corrections to make.
The POUM was not an anarchist organization -- the "Marxist" in its name might give this away. It did, however, have libertarian leanings, and Orwell certainly sympathized greatly with the Spanish anarchists.
Second, you say that Orwell was never censored himself. One item of his did get censored. He wrote an introduction to Animal Farm describing the informal nature of censorship in British media -- it just "wouldn't do" to mention certain things, and so on -- and this was not included in the book.
9 - gypsyman
I can't believe I forgot about the introduction to Animal Farm. Your very right in that correction. To be honest I was just expressing amazment at the freedom he was allowed in his collumns.
As to the POUM, I know about the marxest element within the group. But the impressions I received from reading the book was how "anarchist"they were in structure. Soldiers not having to obey a direct order, no saluting, etc. I must really be clearer in my use of termanolgy and how it is applied.
gypsyman
10 - Scott Butki
I just finished listening to Animal Farm on audiotape and I dont think it included the introduction. Is it available elsewhere?
I'm gonna listen to 1984 next.
11 - nugget
Orwell was aight. Huxley was better.
12 - Richard Marcus
Scott: I don't know if the introduction is available on audiotapes, but any newer additon of the print version will include it, as well I believe one of the Penguin collections of his essays contains the original introduction.
Richard Marcus
13 - Scott Butki
I'll check it out. Thanks, Richard.
Nugget, I'll have to listen to Huxley again.
What's funny is I read those books as teenagers and missed lots of the political nuances.
14 - Scott Butki
Picked up 1984 today at the library to listen to in the car.
15 - Baronius
I don't know what inspired me, but I just re-read Animal Farm over the past few days. One thing that always struck me about the book was that Orwell didn't denounce the farm's principles, only that it fell from them. So the book comes off as not so much socialist as communist.
I mention this for a reason. This was my first time reading Animal Farm since the fall of the Soviet Union. To a contemporary reader, the book could be seen as a condemnation of the fall of the Soviet Union. The farm returning to its historical name and such. So my question is, would Orwell be unhappy with the collapse of Soviet communism?
16 - Richard Marcus
Orwell never made any secret of the fact that a) he was a socialist and b) he thought the Soviet Union wasn't. He thought Stalin was just another totalatarian who didn't have the interests of anyone but himself at heart.
I think that both Animal Farm and 1984 are rejections of the Utopian side of socialism, believing that their can ever be the ideal society.
Would he have mourned the passing of Communist Russia, no I sincerly doubt it, because he didn't like it in the 1930's when for a leftest to be critical of Russia was seen as the ultimate betrayal.
I'm sure if he had lived long enough to see the Kruschev revelations about how really horrid Stalin was, he would have felt quite vindicated, but at the same time upset, because Stalin had given socialism such a bad name.
In fact I'm sure that he would believe that the legacy of the Soviet Union was the tarring of socialism with the same brush of brutality that was associated with communism.
Even today people seem to confuse the two.
Richard Marcus
17 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Richard, perhaps we should carry this a bit further.
First of all, Russians (you get to know a lot of them here) will immediately tell you that the Soviet system was socialism, not communism. In either event, I wouldn't call the Soviet system that Stalin shoved down the throats of the Russian Empire he ruled either socialism or communism. And from what you say about Eric Blair, he didn't appear to think it was either.
It was always my opinion that his works centered on the idea of manipulation of language to lie to others while appearing to tell the truth (see his Afterword to "1984"). But I've been wrong before, and I suppose I will be in the future.
18 - Victor Plenty
In the essay "Politics and the English Language" Orwell further explores the use and abuse of language to lie and to mislead.
19 - Elizabeth
Walking by George's house in Portobello, London a few weeks back, I was struck with reverence. Thank you for spotlighting him here. Too often now we're forgetting the older writers. We can't think that just because the blogosphere is alien to them, they have to be alien to us.
20 - Richard Marcus
Ruvy: Two good points you brought up, Yes they were told they lived in a socialist republic in the Union of Soview Socialist Republics, but I would no more consider that counrtry socialist, than I would have considered East Germany Democratic, (the Democratic German Republic) or the Nazi's Socialist. Hell Tony Blair considers himself a socialist, at least he's the head of the labour party, which is nominaly socialist. Isn't Israel's labour part considered left of centre?
Like I said for Orwell, the momento of the U.S.S.R. would have been giveing socialism a bad name (of course according to some, it doesn't need any help, but no comments from the cheap seats Al and Dave!!!):)
Second point use of language, your dead on that was his other big bone of contention. He had worked in the BBC porpaganda wing, and got to witness first hand the abuses of language, he also had lots to say about his own supposed allies on the left and their use of language.
It was during Watergate and Ron Ziegler's amazing non denials that I first became aware of a gradual humming noise that's been getting louder as the days pass: Orwell spinning in his grave. What he would have made of spid doctors, and words like "colatarl damage" is easy to guess...
Elizabeth, what I most regret is that he is only known for two works, the two that have been mentioned most in the comments of this post. Animal Farm and 1984. His essays are one of the best running dialogues of the period of history that he lived through.
While they are undeniably from one political perspective only, he was always astute enough not to fall into the usual traps of people writing with a political point of view. He was as critical of the left as the right.
I have tried,with some success I hope, to emulate that style. In this day and age he is someone we could all do to remember.
Richard Marcus
21 - Jim Wynne
Good job, Richard. One minor beef: it's Wodehouse, not Woodhouse (although the pronunication would lead one to believe the opposite).
IMO, Orwell's Shooting an Elephant is as good a piece of essay writing as anyone did in English in the 20th century.
22 - Scott Butki
I did a paper on that essay once. It is incredibly good. The essay, I mean, not my paper:)