Final Thoughts: Stockholm Syndrome Part 2

Given that this whole section of the book was all about torture and O’Brien trying to change Winston’s thoughts, I wasn’t particularly surprised by the ending. Although it was expected, I just wanted to finish reading once and for all so that there wouldn’t be any more surprises. 

But going off of my last two blog posts, I was honestly left wondering how O’Brien had enough time to pay all that attention to Winston. There are probably hundreds of people who go to the Ministry of Love each day. 

Does the fact that Winston was desperate for O’Brien to be a like-minded dissident of the Party interest him? Maybe O’Brien, who we know is particularly sadistic, took pleasure in torturing Winston. Maybe he saw how Winston’s conflicted relationship with him developed over time, and true to the principles of doublethink, he both loves Winston and is repulsed by him. 

I’m not sure how the imagery of Big Brother ties into all this, but I kind of imagined O’Brien serving the role as a conduit for Big Brother to exist in real life—a form of personification in a sense. As he died, Winston thought that he loved Big Brother (and the Party in general), which may symbolize his connection to O’Brien that we’ve seen develop since the beginning of the novel. 

Overall, this book was grim, which I kind of liked and kind of didn’t like. Having finished the novel, what are your thoughts? Do you see any nuances in the relationship between Winston and O’Brien? 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Proles, Memories, and Giving Up

Throughout the novel, Winston is aware of the inevitability of being caught by the Thought Police, though this doesn’t seem to affect him as much as I thought it would.  His hope lies in the proles. It was almost as if Winston had already given up, and he was ready to pass his desire for freedom to the only people that weren’t being monitored.  However, unfortunately for Winston, Orwell implies that the proles probably won’t be able to overthrow the Party. Those who have a memory prior to the Revolution are quickly fading away. We see how Orwell characterizes the old man Winston was talking to: his memory is fragmented, his nervous system no more intricate than bits of thread hastily tied together, but even then, he isn’t really able to recall anything particularly relevant to Winston’s questions.  Does he simply exist as a sum of random impressions? Do we know that what he’s saying is even real? To me, this is Orwell’s hopelessness. Is there really a future for the prole...
Read more

Offred's Possibilities

Offred can only trust her own mind, and she’s doing her best to compartmentalize all of the trauma she’s facing in a very logical way. For instance, she simultaneously imagines Luke as being dead, in prison, or alive and escaped—all in hopes of ensuring that she’s prepared for each outcome. She dreams of her daughter, but also considers her to be simultaneously alive and dead. In a dream and in reality.  Imagination and possibility are all that Offred has. She places the daffodil within the bed based on a hope, a longshot. She’s desperate for the possibility that her token will help the next Handmaid, similar to how she discovered clues in her room from the previous Handmaid. But again, all Offred has is the ability to account for all these scenarios.  How does preparing for the future while reconciling with events in the past affect her psyche? Will Offred ever fully recover from this society? For those who’ve read the novel in its entirety, how does this theme relate to the ...
Read more

Predictions

I guess I’ll start by talking about the doctor’s usage of the word “sterile.” It seemed to surprise Offred. This goes hand in hand with my prediction from last week—that something might have happened to make men go sterile all of the sudden. But men can’t be sterile in this world; in Gilead, reproductive failure is always because a woman is “barren.” And this is used to justify the oppression of women, cementing the role of the Handmaid.  About that, the Handmaid’s role. It was initially hard to tell what Atwood was referring to, as much of the language surrounding the topic was within Biblical euphemisms. And while I’ve never read the Bible, it definitely seems like the society of Gilead is twisting phrases and taking quotes out of context in order to subjugate women. I think that this speaks to the larger role religion as well as the suppression of media can play in oppressive systems.  For example, I remember learning in history class that enslaved people were taught twist...
Read more