= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
NancyLebovitz comments on Human Evil and Muddled Thinking - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (138)
It is indeed misleading to describe Orwell's Catalonian comrades-in-arms as capital-C "Communists," since this would imply that they were controlled from Moscow, which they weren't. (They were a mix of local independent communists and anarchists.) However, in Homage to Catalonia, there are several passages where Orwell presents clear evidence of their terror, murder, vandalism, and forcible suppression of all opposition, which he however excuses and rationalizes away, never toning down his utterly idealistic appraisal of them. His general comments about the war are also clearly remote from reality and biased in the pro-communist (small-c) direction, and on occasions he obviously relays the communist propaganda as a complete dupe. On the whole, as a propagandist for his favored side, he commits pretty much all the sins for which he would later bitterly excoriate the orthodox Stalinists, if perhaps in a less blatant manner.
So on the whole, I wouldn't say that his hands are that clean. He certainly didn't deserve the place in intellectual history he was eventually awarded, in the sense of being remembered as the unwavering fighter for truth, clear thinking, intellectual honesty, and opposition to political lies and gangsterism. Certainly some of his contemporaries were far more deserving of such description, and yet hardly anyone remembers them today.
I would say that he's remembered as the writer of two of the most influential books opposing tyranny, rather than as an unwavering fighter against truth, clear thinking, intellectual honesty, and opposition to political lies and gangsterism.
Homage to Catalonia came out in 1938. 1984 came out in 1949. Is it possible that his experiences (perhaps including realizing what he'd been excusing) had something to do with 1984?
Well, the article that started this discussion describes him in these terms. It is true that most people who have heard of him know him only as the writer of these two books. But among people who know more about him, as far as I've seen, he typically has this illustrious image.
As far as I can tell, he never ceased admiring the "revolutionary" regime that ruled over Catalonia before the Communists took over. However, even regardless of that particular issue, his views have definitely never been particularly free of ideological bias -- and here I'm not comparing him with some unreachable ideal, but with other people who lived and wrote at the same time. Yes, he was certainly much better than the typical Stalinist intellectual of the time, but that's an awfully low bar to clear, and some other people managed to clear much higher ones.
Fair enough. I didn't check back to the article, and only went with my impression of his reputation-- the latter is a mistake I should watch out for, since I seem to be less inclined to think of famous people as comprehensively wonderful than most.
Orwell was still something of a totalitarian to the day he died, but that is what made him great. He understood totalitarianism from the inside, and so condemned it in an accurate and insightful way that no outsider could condemn it.
In "Nineteen eighty four" Orwell whitewashes Trotsky's disagreement with Stalin as merely a matter of technical details, represented by the windmill, but in actual fact, it was over terror, torture, and mass murder. Trotsky complained that Stalin was not tough enough on the peasants, and objected to torture and murder being slowed down and obstructed by bureaucracy and red tape. But we do not look to the book for an accurate history of Russia. We read the book to understand how totalitarians think.
No one who had not been well and truly totalitarian could have written such a book.