Isaac Deutscher 1955

1984 The Mysticism of Cruelty

Source: Isaac Deutscher, Heretics and Renegades and Other Essays (Hamish and Hamilton, London, 1955). Scanned
and prepared for the Marist Internet !rchi"e #$ %aul &le'ers. (r'ell al'a$s referred to his #oo) as Nineteen
Eighty-Four* 'e ha"e )ept here Deutscher+s numerical renderin, of the title.
&e' no"els 'ritten in this ,eneration ha"e o#tained a popularit$ as ,reat as that of -eor,e (r'ell+s
1984. &e', if an$, ha"e made a similar impact on politics. .he title of (r'ell+s #oo) is a political
#$/'ord. .he terms coined #$ him 0 12e'spea)+, 1(ldspea)+, 1Muta#ilit$ of the %ast+, 13i,
3rother+, 1Ministr$ of .ruth+, 1.hou,ht %olice+, 14rimethin)+, 1Dou#lethin)+, 1Hate/'ee)+, etc 0
ha"e entered the political "oca#ular$* the$ occur in most ne'spaper articles and speeches
denouncin, 5ussia and communism. .ele"ision and the cinema ha"e familiarised man$ millions of
"ie'ers on #oth sides of the !tlantic 'ith the menacin, face of 3i, 3rother and the ni,htmare of a
supposedl$ communist (ceania. .he no"el has ser"ed as a sort of an ideolo,ical super/'eapon in
the cold 'ar. !s in no other #oo) or document, the con"ulsi"e fear of communism, 'hich has s'ept
the 6est since the end of the Second 6orld 6ar, has #een reflected and focused in 1984.
.he cold 'ar has created a 1social demand+ for such an ideolo,ical 'eapon 7ust as it creates the
demand for ph$sical super/'eapons. 3ut the super/'eapons are ,enuine feats of technolo,$* and
there can #e no discrepanc$ #et'een the uses to 'hich the$ ma$ #e put and the intention of their
producers: the$ are meant to spread death or at least to threaten utter destruction. ! #oo) li)e 1984
ma$ #e used 'ithout much re,ard for the author+s intention. Some of its features ma$ #e torn out of
their contet, 'hile others, 'hich do not suit the political purpose 'hich the #oo) is made to ser"e,
are i,nored or "irtuall$ suppressed. 2or need a #oo) li)e 1984 #e a literar$ masterpiece or e"en an
important and ori,inal 'or) to ma)e its impact. Indeed a 'or) of ,reat literar$ merit is usuall$ too
rich in its teture and too su#tle in thou,ht and form to lend itself to ad"entitious eploitation. !s a
rule, its s$m#ols cannot easil$ #e transformed into h$pnotisin, #o,ies, or its ideas turned into
slo,ans. .he 'ords of a ,reat poet 'hen the$ enter the political "oca#ular$ do so #$ a process of
slo', almost impercepti#le infiltration, not #$ a frantic incursion. .he literar$ masterpiece
influences the political mind #$ fertilisin, and enrichin, it from the inside, not #$ stunnin, it.
1984 is the 'or) of an intense and concentrated, #ut also fear/ridden and restricted ima,ination. !
hostile critic has dismissed it as a 1political horror/comic+. .his is not a fair description: there are in
(r'ell+s no"el certain la$ers of thou,ht and feelin, 'hich raise it 'ell a#o"e that le"el. 3ut it is a
fact that the s$m#olism of 1984 is crude* that its chief s$m#ol, 3i, 3rother, resem#les the
#o,$/man of a rather inartistic nurser$ tale* and that (r'ell+s stor$ unfolds li)e the plot of a
science/fiction film of the cheaper "ariet$, 'ith mechanical horror pilin, up upon mechanical horror
so much that, in the end, (r'ell+s su#tler ideas, his pit$ for his characters, and his satire on the
societ$ of his o'n da$s (not of 1989) ma$ fail to communicate themsel"es to the reader. 1984 does
not seem to 7ustif$ the description of (r'ell as the modern S'ift, a description for 'hich Animal
Farm pro"ides some 7ustification. (r'ell lac)s the richness and su#tlet$ of thou,ht and the
philosophical detachment of the ,reat satirist. His ima,ination is ferocious and at times penetratin,,
#ut it lac)s 'idth, suppleness and ori,inalit$.
.he lac) of ori,inalit$ is illustrated #$ the fact that (r'ell #orro'ed the idea of 1984, the plot, the
chief characters, the s$m#ols and the 'hole climate of his stor$ from a 5ussian 'riter 'ho has
remained almost un)no'n in the 6est. .hat 'riter is :",enii ;am$atin, and the title of the #oo)
'hich ser"ed (r'ell as the model is We. Li)e 1984, We is an 1anti/<topia+, a ni,htmare "ision of
the shape of thin,s to come, and a 4assandra cr$. (r'ell+s 'or) is a thorou,hl$ :n,lish "ariation
on ;am$atin+s theme* and it is perhaps onl$ the thorou,hness of (r'ell+s :n,lish approach that
,i"es to his 'or) the ori,inalit$ that it possesses.
! fe' 'ords a#out ;am$atin ma$ not #e out of place here: there are some points of resem#lance in
the life/stories of the t'o 'riters. ;am$atin #elon,ed to an older ,eneration: he 'as #orn in 1889
and died in 19=>. His earl$ 'ritin,s, li)e some of (r'ell+s, 'ere realistic descriptions of the lo'er
middle class. In his eperience the 5ussian re"olution of 19?5 pla$ed approimatel$ the same role
that the Spanish ci"il 'ar pla$ed in (r'ell+s. He participated in the re"olutionar$ mo"ement, 'as a
mem#er of the 5ussian Social Democratic %art$ (to 'hich 3olshe"i)s and Menshe"i)s then still
#elon,ed), and 'as persecuted #$ the .sarist police. !t the e## of the re"olution, he succum#ed to a
mood of 1cosmic pessimism@* and he se"ered his connection 'ith the Socialist %art$, a thin, 'hich
(r'ell, less consistent and to the end influenced #$ a lin,erin, lo$alt$ to socialism, did not do. In
191> ;am$atin "ie'ed the ne' re"olution 'ith cold and disillusioned e$es, con"inced that nothin,
,ood 'ould come out of it. !fter a #rief imprisonment, he 'as allo'ed #$ the 3olshe"i)
,o"ernment to ,o a#road* and it 'as as an Ami,rA in %aris that he 'rote We in the earl$ 19B?s.
.he assertion that (r'ell #orro'ed the main elements of 1984 from ;am$atin is not the ,uess of a
critic 'ith a foi#le for tracin, literar$ influences. (r'ell )ne' ;am$atin+s no"el and 'as fascinated
#$ it. He 'rote an essa$ a#out it, 'hich appeared in the left/socialist Triune, of 'hich (r'ell 'as
Literar$ :ditor, on 9 Canuar$ 199D, 7ust after the pu#lication of Animal Farm and #efore he #e,an
'ritin, 1984. .he essa$ is remar)a#le not onl$ as a conclusi"e piece of e"idence, supplied #$
(r'ell himself, on the ori,in of 1984, #ut also as a commentar$ on the idea underl$in, #oth We and
1984.
.he essa$ #e,ins 'ith (r'ell sa$in, that after ha"in, for $ears loo)ed in "ain for ;am$atin+s
no"el, he had at last o#tained it in a &rench edition (under the title Nous Autres), and that he 'as
surprised that it had not #een pu#lished in :n,land, althou,h an !merican edition had appeared
'ithout arousin, much interest. 1So far as I can 7ud,e+, (r'ell 'ent on, 1it is not a #oo) of the first
order, #ut it is certainl$ an unusual one, and it is astonishin, that no :n,lish pu#lisher has #een
enterprisin, enou,h to reissue it.+ (He concluded the essa$ 'ith the 'ords: 1.his is a #oo) to loo)
out for 'hen an :n,lish "ersion appears.+)
(r'ell noticed that !ldous Hule$+s !ra"e Ne# World $must #e partl$ deri"ed+ from ;am$atin+s
no"el and 'ondered 'h$ this had 1ne"er #een pointed out+. ;am$atin+s #oo) 'as, in his "ie', much
superior and more 1rele"ant to our o'n situation+ than Hule$+s. It dealt 1'ith the re#ellion of the
primiti"e human spirit a,ainst a rationalised, mechanised, painless 'orld+.
1%ainless+ is not the ri,ht ad7ecti"e: the 'orld of ;am$atin+s "ision is as full of horrors as is that of
1984. (r'ell himself produced in his essa$ a succinct catalo,ue of those horrors so that his essa$
reads no' li)e a s$nopsis of 1984. .he mem#ers of the societ$ descri#ed #$ ;am$atin, sa$s (r'ell,
1ha"e so completel$ lost their indi"idualit$ as to #e )no'n onl$ #$ num#ers. .he$ li"e in ,lass
houses... 'hich ena#les the political police, )no'n as the E-uardians,F to super"ise them more
easil$. .he$ all 'ear identical uniforms, and a human #ein, is commonl$ referred to either as Ea
num#erF or a EunifF (uniform).+ (r'ell remar)s in parenthesis that ;am$atin 'rote 1#efore
tele"ision 'as in"ented+. In 1984 this technolo,ical refinement is #rou,ht in as 'ell as the
helicopters from 'hich the police super"ise the homes of the citiGens of (ceania in the openin,
passa,es of the no"el. .he 1unifs+ su,,est the 1%roles+. In ;am$atin+s societ$ of the future as in
1984 lo"e is for#idden: seual intercourse is strictl$ rationed and permitted onl$ as an unemotional
act. 1.he Sin,le State is ruled o"er #$ a person )no'n as the 3enefactor+, the o#"ious protot$pe of
3i, 3rother.
1.he ,uidin, principle of the state is that happiness and freedom are incompati#le... the Sin,le State
has restored his Hman+sI happiness #$ remo"in, his freedom.+ (r'ell descri#es ;am$atin+s chief
character as 1a sort of <topian 3ill$ 3ro'n of London to'n+ 'ho is 1constantl$ horrified #$ the
ata"istic impulses 'hich seiGe upon him+. In (r'ell+s no"el that <topian 3ill$ 3ro'n is christened
6inston Smith, and his pro#lem is the same.
&or the main moti% of his plot (r'ell is similarl$ inde#ted to the 5ussian 'riter. .his is ho' (r'ell
defines it: 1In spite of education and the "i,ilance of the -uardians, man$ of the ancient human
instincts are still there.+ ;am$atin+s chief character 1falls in lo"e (this is a crime, of course) 'ith a
certain I/==?+ 7ust as 6inston Smith commits the crime of fallin, in lo"e 'ith Culia. In ;am$atin+s
as in (r'ell+s stor$ the lo"e affair is mied up 'ith the hero+s participation in an 1under,round
resistance mo"ement+. ;am$atin+s re#els 1apart from plottin, the o"erthro' of the state, e"en
indul,e, at the moment 'hen their curtains are do'n, in such "ices as smo)in, ci,arettes and
drin)in, alcohol@* 6inston Smith and Culia indul,e in drin)in, 1real coffee 'ith real su,ar+ in their
hideout o"er Mr 4harrin,ton+s shop. In #oth no"els the crime and the conspirac$ are, of course,
disco"ered #$ the -uardians or the .hou,ht %olice* and in #oth the hero 1is ultimatel$ sa"ed from
the conseJuences of his o'n foll$+.
.he com#ination of 1cure+ and torture #$ 'hich ;am$atin+s and (r'ell+s re#els are 1freed+ from the
ata"istic impulses, until the$ #e,in to lo"e 3enefactor or 3i, 3rother, are "er$ much the same. In
;am$atin:
.he authorities announce that the$ ha"e disco"ered the cause of the recent disorders: it is that some
human #ein,s suffer from a disease called ima,ination. .he ner"e centre responsi#le for
ima,ination has no' #een located, and the disease can #e cured #$ K/ra$ treatment. D/5?=
under,oes the operation, after 'hich it is eas$ for him to do 'hat he has )no'n all alon, that he
ou,ht to do 0 that is, #etra$ his confederates to the police.
In #oth no"els the act of confession and the #etra$al of the 'oman the hero lo"es are the curati"e
shoc)s.
(r'ell Juotes the follo'in, scene of torture from ;am$atin:
She loo)ed at me, her hands claspin, the arms of the chair, until her e$es 'ere completel$ shut.
.he$ too) her out, #rou,ht her to herself #$ means of an electric shoc), and put her under the #ell
a,ain. .his operation 'as repeated three times, and not a 'ord issued from her lips.
In (r'ell+s scenes of torture the 1electric shoc)s+ and the 1arms of the chair+ recur Juite often, #ut
(r'ell is far more intense, masochistic/sadistic, in his descriptions of cruelt$ and pain. &or
instance:
6ithout an$ 'arnin, ecept a sli,ht mo"ement of (@3rien+s hand, a 'a"e of pain flooded his #od$.
It 'as a fri,htenin, pain, #ecause he could not see 'hat 'as happenin,, and he had the feelin, that
some mortal in7ur$ 'as #ein, done to him. He did not )no' 'hether the thin, 'as reall$
happenin,, or 'hether the effect 'as electricall$ produced* #ut his #od$ had #een 'renched out of
shape, the 7oints 'ere #ein, slo'l$ torn apart. !lthou,h the pain had #rou,ht the s'eat out on his
forehead, the 'orst of all 'as the fear that his #ac)#one 'as a#out to snap. He set his teeth and
#reathed hard throu,h his nose, tr$in, to )eep silent as lon, as possi#le.
.he list of (r'ell+s #orro'in,s is far from complete* #ut let us no' turn from the plot of the t'o
no"els to their underl$in, idea. .a)in, up the comparison #et'een ;am$atin and Hule$, (r'ell
sa$s: 1It is this intuiti"e ,rasp of the irrational side of totalitarianism 0 human sacrifice, cruelt$ as an
end in itself, the 'orship of a Leader 'ho is credited 'ith di"ine attri#utes 0 that ma)es ;am$atin+s
#oo) superior to Hule$+s.+ It is this, 'e ma$ add, that made of it (r'ell+s model. 4riticisin,
Hule$, (r'ell 'rites that he could find no clear reason 'h$ the societ$ of !ra"e Ne# World
should #e so ri,idl$ and ela#oratel$ stratified:
.he aim is not economic eploitation... There is no &o#er-hunger, no sadism, no hardness o% any
'ind. .hose at the top ha"e no stron, moti"e for sta$in, on the top, and thou,h e"er$one is happ$ in
a "acuous 'a$, life has #ecome so pointless that it is difficult to #elie"e that such a societ$ could
endure.+ HM$ italicsI
In contrast, the societ$ of ;am$atin+s anti/<topia could endure, in (r'ell+s "ie', #ecause in it the
supreme moti"e of action and the reason for social stratification are not economic eploitation, for
'hich there is no need, #ut precisel$ the 1po'er/hun,er, sadism and hardness+ of those 'ho 1sta$ at
the top+. It is eas$ to reco,nise in this the leitmoti% of 1984.
In (ceania technolo,ical de"elopment has reached so hi,h a le"el that societ$ could 'ell satisf$ all
its material needs and esta#lish eJualit$ in its midst. 3ut ineJualit$ and po"ert$ are maintained in
order to )eep 3i, 3rother in po'er. In the past, sa$s (r'ell, dictatorship safe,uarded ineJualit$,
no' ineJualit$ safe,uards dictatorship. 3ut 'hat purpose does the dictatorship itself ser"eL
.he part$ see)s po'er entirel$ for its o'n sa)e... %o'er is not a means, it is an end. (ne does not
esta#lish a dictatorship in order to safe,uard a re"olution* one ma)es the re"olution in order to
esta#lish the dictatorship. .he o#7ect of persecution is persecution... .he o#7ect of po'er is po'er.
(r'ell 'ondered 'hether ;am$atin did 1intend the So"iet re,ime to #e the special tar,et of his
satire+. He 'as not sure of this:
6hat ;am$atin seems to #e aimin, at is not an$ particular countr$ #ut the implied aims of the
industrial ci"ilisation... It is e"ident from We that he had a stron, leanin, to'ards primiti"ism... We
is in effect a stud$ of the Machine, the ,enie that man has thou,htlessl$ let out of its #ottle and
cannot put #ac) a,ain.
.he same am#i,uit$ of the author+s aim is e"ident also in 1984.
(r'ell+s ,uess a#out ;am$atin 'as correct. .hou,h ;am$atin 'as opposed to the So"iet re,ime, it
'as not eclusi"el$, or e"en mainl$, that re,ime 'hich he satirised. !s (r'ell ri,htl$ remar)ed, the
earl$ So"iet 5ussia had fe' features in common 'ith the super/mechanised state of ;am$atin+s
anti/<topia. .hat 'riter+s leanin, to'ards primiti"ism 'as in line 'ith a 5ussian tradition, 'ith
Sla"ophilism and hostilit$ to'ards the #our,eois 6est, 'ith the ,lorification of the mu(hi' and of
the old patriarchal 5ussia, 'ith .olsto$ and Dosto$e"s)$. :"en as an Ami,rA, ;am$atin 'as
disillusioned 'ith the 6est in the characteristicall$ 5ussian fashion. !t times he seemed
half/reconciled 'ith the So"iet re,ime 'hen it 'as alread$ producin, its 3enefactor in the person
of Stalin. In so far as he directed the darts of his satire a,ainst 3olshe"ism, he did so on the ,round
that 3olshe"ism 'as #ent on replacin, the old primiti"e 5ussia #$ the modern, mechanised societ$.
4uriousl$ enou,h, he set his stor$ in the $ear BD??* and he seemed to sa$ to the 3olshe"i)s: this is
'hat 5ussia 'ill loo) li)e if $ou succeed in ,i"in, to $our re,ime the #ac),round of 6estern
technolo,$. In ;am$atin, li)e in some other 5ussian intellectuals disillusioned 'ith socialism, the
han)erin, after the primiti"e modes of thou,ht and life 'as in so far natural as primiti"ism 'as still
stron,l$ ali"e in the 5ussian #ac),round.
In (r'ell there 'as and there could #e no such authentic nostal,ia after the pre/industrial societ$.
%rimiti"ism had no part in his eperience and #ac),round, ecept durin, his sta$ in 3urma, 'hen
he 'as hardl$ attracted #$ it. 3ut he 'as terrified of the uses to 'hich technolo,$ mi,ht #e put #$
men determined to ensla"e societ$* and so he, too, came to Juestion and satirise 1the implied aims
of industrial ci"ilisation+.
!lthou,h his satire is more reco,nisa#l$ aimed at So"iet 5ussia than ;am$atin+s, (r'ell sa'
elements of (ceania in the :n,land of his o'n da$s as 'ell, not to spea) of the <nited States.
Indeed, the societ$ of 1984 em#odies all that he hated and disli)ed in his o'n surroundin,s: the
dra#ness and monoton$ of the :n,lish industrial su#ur#, the 1filth$ and ,rim$ and smell$+ u,liness
of 'hich he tried to match in his naturalistic, repetiti"e and oppressi"e st$le* the food rationin, and
the ,o"ernment controls 'hich he )ne' in 'artime 3ritain* the 1ru##ish$ ne'spapers containin,
almost nothin, ecept sport, crime and astrolo,$, sensational fi"e/cent no"elettes, films ooGin, 'ith
se@* and so on. (r'ell )ne' 'ell that ne'spapers of this sort did not eist in Stalinist 5ussia, and
that the faults of the Stalinist press 'ere of an alto,ether different )ind. Ne#s&ea' is much less a
satire on the Stalinist idiom than on !n,lo/!merican 7ournalistic 1ca#lese+, 'hich he loathed and
'ith 'hich, as a 'or)in, 7ournalist, he 'as 'ell familiar.
It is eas$ to tell 'hich features of the part$ of 1984 satirise the 3ritish La#our %art$ rather than the
So"iet 4ommunist %art$. 3i, 3rother and his follo'ers ma)e no attempt to indoctrinate the
'or)in, class, an omission (r'ell 'ould ha"e #een the last to ascri#e to Stalinism. His %roles
1"e,etate+: 1hea"$ 'or), pett$ Juarrels, films, ,am#lin,... fill their mental horiGon+. Li)e the
ru##ish$ ne'spapers and the films ooGin, 'ith se, so ,am#lin,, the ne' opium of the people, does
not #elon, to the 5ussian scene. .he Ministr$ of .ruth is a transparent caricature of London+s
'artime Ministr$ of Information. .he monster of (r'ell+s "ision is, li)e e"er$ ni,htmare, made up
of all sorts of faces and features and shapes, familiar and unfamiliar. (r'ell+s talent and ori,inalit$
are e"ident in the domestic aspect of his satire. 3ut in the "o,ue 'hich 1984 has en7o$ed that aspect
has rarel$ #een noticed.
1984 is a document of dar) disillusionment not onl$ 'ith Stalinism #ut 'ith e"er$ form and shade
of socialism. It is a cr$ from the a#$ss of despair. 6hat plun,ed (r'ell into that a#$ssL It 'as
'ithout an$ dou#t the spectacle of the Stalinist -reat %ur,es of 19=D/=8, the repercussions of 'hich
he eperienced in 4atalonia. !s a man of sensiti"it$ and inte,rit$, he could not react to the pur,es
other'ise than 'ith an,er and horror. His conscience could not #e soothed #$ the Stalinist
7ustifications and sophisms 'hich at the time did soothe the conscience of, for instance, !rthur
Moestler, a 'riter of ,reater #rilliance and sophistication #ut of less moral resolution. .he Stalinist
7ustifications and sophisms 'ere #oth eneath and ao"e (r'ell+s le"el of reasonin, 0 the$ 'ere
#eneath and a#o"e the common sense and the stu##orn empiricism of 3ill$ 3ro'n of London to'n,
'ith 'hom (r'ell identified himself e"en in his most re#ellious or re"olutionar$ moments. He 'as
outra,ed, shoc)ed and sha)en in his #eliefs. He had ne"er #een a mem#er of the 4ommunist %art$.
3ut, as an adherent of the semi/.rots)$ist %(<M, he had, despite all his reser"ations, tacitl$
assumed a certain communit$ of purpose and solidarit$ 'ith the So"iet re,ime throu,h all its
"icissitudes and transformations, 'hich 'ere to him some'hat o#scure and eotic.
.he pur,es and their Spanish repercussions not onl$ destro$ed that communit$ of purpose. 2ot onl$
did he see the ,ulf #et'een Stalinists and anti/Stalinists openin, suddenl$ inside em#attled
5epu#lican Spain. .his, the immediate effect of the pur,es, 'as o"ershado'ed #$ 1the irrational
side of totalitarianism 0 human sacrifice, cruelt$ as an end in itself, the 'orship of a Leader+, and
1the colour of the sinister sla"e/ci"ilisations of the ancient 'orld+ spreadin, o"er contemporar$
societ$.
Li)e most 3ritish socialists, (r'ell had ne"er #een a Marist. .he dialectical/materialist
philosoph$ had al'a$s #een too a#struse for him. &rom instinct rather than consciousness he had
#een a staunch rationalist. .he distinction #et'een the Marist and the rationalist is of some
importance. 4ontrar$ to an opinion 'idespread in !n,lo/Saon countries, Marism is not at all
rationalist in its philosoph$: it does not assume that human #ein,s are, as a rule, ,uided #$ rational
moti"es and that the$ can #e ar,ued into socialism #$ reason. Mar himself #e,ins )as *a&ital
'ith the ela#orate philosophical and historical inJuir$ into the 1fetishistic+ modes of thou,ht and
#eha"iour rooted in 1commodit$ production+ 0 that is, in man+s 'or) for, and dependence on, a
mar)et. .he class stru,,le, as Mar descri#es it, is an$thin, #ut a rational process. .his does not
pre"ent the rationalists of socialism descri#in, themsel"es sometimes as Marists. 3ut the authentic
Marist ma$ claim to #e mentall$ #etter prepared than the rationalist is for the manifestations of
irrationalit$ in human affairs, e"en for such manifestations as Stalin+s -reat %ur,es. He ma$ feel
upset or mortified #$ them, #ut he need not feel sha)en in his Weltanschauung, 'hile the rationalist
is lost and helpless 'hen the irrationalit$ of the human eistence suddenl$ stares him in the face. If
he clin,s to his rationalism, realit$ eludes him. If he pursues realit$ and tries to ,rasp it, he must
part 'ith his rationalism.
(r'ell pursued realit$ and found himself #ereft of his conscious and unconscious assumptions
a#out life. In his thou,hts he could not henceforth ,et a'a$ from the %ur,es. Directl$ and indirectl$,
the$ supplied the su#7ect matter for nearl$ all that he 'rote after his Spanish eperience. .his 'as
an honoura#le o#session, the o#session of a mind not inclined to cheat itself comforta#l$ and to
stop ,rapplin, 'ith an alarmin, moral pro#lem. 3ut ,rapplin, 'ith the %ur,es, his mind #ecame
infected #$ their irrationalit$. He found himself incapa#le of eplainin, 'hat 'as happenin, in
terms 'hich 'ere familiar to him, the terms of empirical common sense. !#andonin, rationalism,
he increasin,l$ "ie'ed realit$ throu,h the dar) ,lasses of a Juasi/m$stical pessimism.
It has #een said that 1984 is the fi,ment of the ima,ination of a d$in, man. .here is some truth in
this, #ut not the 'hole truth. It 'as indeed 'ith the last fe"erish flic)er of life in him that (r'ell
'rote this #oo). Hence the etraordinar$, ,loom$ intensit$ of his "ision and lan,ua,e, and the
almost ph$sical immediac$ 'ith 'hich he suffered the tortures 'hich his creati"e ima,ination 'as
inflictin, on his chief character. He identified his o'n 'itherin, ph$sical eistence 'ith the
deca$ed and shrun)en #od$ of 6inston Smith, to 'hom he imparted and in 'hom he in"ested, as it
'ere, his o'n d$in, pan,s. He pro7ected the last spasms of his o'n sufferin, into the last pa,es of
his last #oo). 3ut the main eplanation of the inner lo,ic of (r'ell+s disillusionment and pessimism
lies not in the 'riter+s death a,onies, #ut in the eperience and the thou,ht of the li"in, man and in
his con"ulsi"e reaction from his defeated rationalism.
1I understand ho#: I do not understand #hy+ is the refrain of 1984. 6inston Smith )no's ho'
(ceania functions and ho' its ela#orate mechanism of t$rann$ 'or)s, #ut he does not )no' 'hat is
its ultimate cause and ultimate purpose. He turns for the ans'er to the pa,es of 1the #oo)+, the
m$sterious classic of crimethin', the authorship of 'hich is attri#uted to :mmanuel -oldstein, the
inspirer of the conspiratorial 3rotherhood. 3ut he mana,es to read throu,h onl$ those chapters of
1the #oo)+ 'hich deal 'ith the ho#. .he .hou,ht %olice descends upon him 7ust 'hen he is a#out to
#e,in readin, the chapters 'hich promise to eplain #hy* and so the Juestion remains unans'ered.
.his 'as (r'ell+s o'n predicament. He as)ed the 6h$ not so much a#out the (ceania of his "ision
as a#out Stalinism and the -reat %ur,es. !t one point he certainl$ turned for the ans'er to .rots)$:
it 'as from .rots)$ 0 3ronstein that he too) the fe' s)etch$ #io,raphical data and e"en the
ph$sio,nom$ and the Ce'ish name for :mmanuel -oldstein* and the fra,ments of 1the #oo)+,
'hich ta)e up so man$ pa,es in 1984, are an o#"ious, thou,h not "er$ successful, paraphrase of
.rots)$+s The Re"olution !etrayed. (r'ell 'as impressed #$ .rots)$+s moral ,randeur and at the
same time he partl$ distrusted it and partl$ dou#ted its authenticit$. .he am#i"alence of his "ie' of
.rots)$ finds its counterpart in 6inston Smith+s attitude to'ards -oldstein. .o the end Smith
cannot find out 'hether -oldstein and the 3rotherhood ha"e e"er eisted in realit$, and 'hether
1the #oo)+ 'as not concocted #$ the .hou,ht %olice. .he #arrier #et'een .rots)$+s thou,ht and
himself, a #arrier 'hich (r'ell could ne"er #rea) do'n, 'as Marism and dialectical materialism.
He found in .rots)$ the ans'er to Ho', not to 6h$.
3ut (r'ell could not content himself 'ith historical a,nosticism. He 'as an$thin, #ut a sceptic.
His mental ma)e/up 'as rather that of the fanatic, determined to ,et an ans'er, a Juic) and a plain
ans'er, to his Juestion. He 'as no' tense 'ith distrust and suspicion and on the loo)/out for the
dar) conspiracies hatched #$ them a,ainst the decencies of 3ill$ 3ro'n of London to'n. They 'ere
the 2aGis, the Stalinists, and 0 4hurchill and 5oose"elt, and ultimatel$ all 'ho had an$ raison
d@+tat to defend, for at heart (r'ell 'as a simple/minded anarchist and, in his e$es, an$ political
mo"ement forfeited its raison d@,tre the moment it acJuired a raison d@+tat. .o anal$se a
complicated social #ac),round, to tr$ and unra"el tan,les of political moti"es, calculations, fears
and suspicions, and to discern the compulsion of circumstances #ehind their action 'as #e$ond
him. -eneralisations a#out social forces, social trends and historic ine"ita#ilities made him #ristle
'ith suspicion. Net, 'ithout some such ,eneralisations, properl$ and sparin,l$ used, no realistic
ans'er could #e ,i"en to the Juestion 'hich preoccupied (r'ell. His ,aGe 'as fied on the trees,
or rather on a sin,le tree, in front of him, and he 'as almost #lind to the 'ood. Net his distrust of
historical ,eneralisations led him in the end to adopt and to clin, to the oldest, the most #anal, the
most a#stract, the most metaph$sical and the most #arren of all ,eneralisations: all their
conspiracies and plots and pur,es and diplomatic deals had one source and one source onl$ 0
1sadistic po'er/hun,er+. .hus he made his 7ump from 'or)ada$, rationalistic common sense to the
m$sticism of cruelt$ 'hich inspires 1984. H1I
In 1984 man+s master$ o"er the machine has reached so hi,h a le"el that societ$ is in a position to
produce plent$ for e"er$#od$ and put an end to ineJualit$. 3ut po"ert$ and ineJualit$ are
maintained onl$ to satisf$ the sadistic ur,es of 3i, 3rother. Net 'e do not e"en )no' 'hether 3i,
3rother reall$ eists 0 he ma$ #e onl$ a m$th. It is the collecti"e cruelt$ of the part$ (not
necessaril$ of its indi"idual mem#ers 'ho ma$ #e intelli,ent and 'ell/meanin, people), that
torments (ceania. .otalitarian societ$ is ruled #$ a disem#odied sadism. (r'ell ima,ined that he
had 1transcended+ the familiar and, as he thou,ht, increasin,l$ irrele"ant concepts of social class
and class interest. 3ut in these Marist ,eneralisations, the interest of a social class #ears at least
some specific relation to the indi"idual interests and the social position of its mem#ers, e"en if the
class interest does not represent a simple sum of the indi"idual interests. In (r'ell+s part$ the 'hole
#ears no relation to the parts. .he part$ is not a social #od$ actuated #$ an$ interest or purpose. It is
a phantom/li)e emanation of all that is foul in human nature. It is the metaph$sical, mad and
triumphant, -host of :"il.
(f course, (r'ell intended 1984 as a 'arnin,. 3ut the 'arnin, defeats itself #ecause of its
underl$in, #oundless despair. (r'ell sa' totalitarianism as #rin,in, histor$ to a standstill. 3i,
3rother is in"inci#le: 1If $ou 'ant a picture of the future, ima,ine a #oot stampin, on a human face
0 for e"er.+ He pro7ected the spectacle of the -reat %ur,es on to the future, and he sa' it fied there
for e"er, #ecause he 'as not capa#le of ,raspin, the e"ents realisticall$, in their comple historical
contet. .o #e sure, the e"ents 'ere hi,hl$ 1irrational@* #ut he 'ho #ecause of this treats them
irrationall$ is "er$ much li)e the ps$chiatrist 'hose mind #ecomes unhin,ed #$ d'ellin, too
closel$ 'ith insanit$. 1984 is in effect not so much a 'arnin, as a piercin, shrie) announcin, the
ad"ent of the 3lac) Millennium, the Millennium of damnation.
.he shrie), amplified #$ all the 1mass/media+ of our time, has fri,htened millions of people. 3ut it
has not helped them to see more clearl$ the issues 'ith 'hich the 'orld is ,rapplin,* it has not
ad"anced their understandin,. It has onl$ increased and intensified the 'a"es of panic and hate that
run throu,h the 'orld and o#fuscate innocent minds. 1984 has tau,ht millions to loo) at the conflict
#et'een :ast and 6est in terms of #lac) and 'hite, and it has sho'n them a monster #o,$ and a
monster scape,oat for all the ills that pla,ue man)ind.
!t the onset of the atomic a,e, the 'orld is li"in, in a mood of !pocal$ptic horror. .hat is 'h$
millions of people respond so passionatel$ to the !pocal$ptic "ision of a no"elist. .he !pocal$ptic
atomic and h$dro,en monsters, ho'e"er, ha"e not #een let loose #$ 3i, 3rother. .he chief
predicament of contemporar$ societ$ is that it has not $et succeeded in ad7ustin, its 'a$ of life and
its social and political institutions to the prodi,ious ad"ance of its technolo,ical )no'led,e. 6e do
not )no' 'hat has #een the impact of the atomic and h$dro,en #om#s on the thou,hts of millions
in the :ast, 'here an,uish and fear ma$ #e hidden #ehind the faOade of a facile (or perhaps
em#arrassedL) official optimism. 3ut it 'ould #e dan,erous to #lind oursel"es to the fact that in the
6est millions of people ma$ #e inclined, in their an,uish and fear, to flee from their o'n
responsi#ilit$ for man)ind+s destin$ and to "ent their an,er and despair on the ,iant
3o,$/cum/Scape,oat 'hich (r'ell+s 1984 has done so much to place #efore their e$es.
* * *
1Ha"e $ou read this #oo)L Nou must read it, sir. .hen $ou 'ill )no' 'h$ 'e must drop the atom
#om# on the 3olshiesP+ 6ith these 'ords a #lind, misera#le ne's/"endor recommended to me 1984
in 2e' Nor), a fe' 'ee)s #efore (r'ell+s death.
%oor (r'ell, could he e"er ima,ine that his o'n #oo) 'ould #ecome so prominent an item in the
pro,ramme of Hate 6ee)L
Notes
1. .his opinion is #ased on personal reminiscences as 'ell as on an anal$sis of (r'ell+s 'or).
Durin, the last 'ar (r'ell seemed attracted #$ the critical, then some'hat unusual, tenor of m$
commentaries on 5ussia 'hich appeared in The Economist, The Oser"er and Triune. (Later 'e
'ere #oth The Oser"er+s correspondents in -erman$ and occasionall$ shared a room in a press
camp.) Ho'e"er, it too) me little time to #ecome a'are of the differences of approach #ehind our
seemin, a,reement. I remem#er that I 'as ta)en a#ac) #$ the stu##ornness 'ith 'hich (r'ell
d'elt on 1conspiracies+, and that his political reasonin, struc) me as a &reudian su#limation of
persecution mania. He 'as, for instance, unsha)a#l$ con"inced that Stalin, 4hurchill and 5oose"elt
consciousl$ plotted to di"ide the 'orld, and to di"ide it for ,ood, amon, themsel"es, and to
su#7u,ate it in common. (I can trace the idea of (ceania, :astasia and :urasia #ac) to that time.)
1They are all po'er/hun,r$+, he used to repeat. 6hen once I pointed out to him that underneath the
apparent solidarit$ of the 3i, .hree one could discern clearl$ the conflict #et'een them, alread$
comin, to the surface, (r'ell 'as so startled and incredulous that he at once related our
con"ersation in his column in Triune, and added that he sa' no si,n of the approach of the conflict
of 'hich I spo)e. .his 'as #$ the time of the Nalta conference, or shortl$ thereafter, 'hen not much
foresi,ht 'as needed to see 'hat 'as comin,. 6hat struc) me in (r'ell 'as his lac) of historical
sense and of ps$cholo,ical insi,ht into political life coupled 'ith an acute, thou,h narro',
penetration into some aspects of politics and 'ith an incorrupti#le firmness of con"iction. H-eor,e
(r'ell, 1!s I %lease+, Triune, BD Canuar$ 1995 0 Deutscher is not mentioned #$ name, and 'here
the article has #een reproduced no reference to him is ,i"en* see The -ollected Essays and .etters
o% /eorge Or#ell, Qolume = (Harmonds'orth, 1989), p =D9* -eor,e (r'ell, -ollected Wor's,
Qolume 1> (London, 1998), p =?* Or#ell in Triune (London, B??D), pp B=5/=D 0 MI!.I