Dissertation (PhD)--Stellenbosch University, 2000. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: This thesis uses Mikhail Bakhtin's theory of dialogism, as well as postmodernism, to open up faultlines in satire, and to explore and challenge various perceptions and discourses surrounding and related to it. Both dialogism and postmodernism are used to suggest fresh approaches to satire, by repositioning it in relation to other discourses and reframing it as a complex dynamic, rather than a closed and inflexible system. Chapter 1 of the thesis opens with an historical survey of the beginnings and subsequent development of satire. It also contains a general discussion of the nature of satiric strategies and opens the door for the incorporation of postmodern perspectives into the argument. Chapter 2 contrasts the issues of morality and re-presentation in satire, arguing that satirists do not simply invite their audience to condemn, but offer them an opportunity to discover alternative worlds. The affinity between satire and postmodernism is emphasised by the postmodern predilection for modes highly favoured by satire: allegory, parody and fantasy. In Chapter 3 the issue of language and its referents is explored, starting with Saussure's theory of how the signifier and the signified function. It is argued that satire has never respected this fixed relationship, and that it is in this respect similar to deconstruction. The last part of the chapter is devoted to examining four key socio-political discourses - psychoanalysis, ideology, propaganda and political myth - in relation to satire. These four discourses are, like satire, intent on influencing the perceptions which people have of the world. The intention in juxtaposing these discourses is to create a dialogic process which will throw a fresh light on all of them, including satire itself. The four socio-political discourses named above play an important part in Animal Farm and Nineteen Eighty-Four, and are relevant to the subsequent discussion of these novels. Chapter 4 consists of a detailed discussion of Animal Farm, in which the various layers comprising the work are examined. The satirical aspects of the novel are closely related to the fabular and fairy tale elements which are an important part of its constitution. These elements or levels are juxtaposed with the historical details alluded to continuously in Animal Farm and indicate its close concern with the world outside the novel. Chapter 5 consists of a detailed exploration of Nineteen Eighty-Four, which is illuminated by a process of dialogism between the modernist ideology from which the novel springs and the postmodern perspective introduced into the thesis, as well as the four socio-political discourses mentioned earlier. The main postmodern theories used in this chapter are those of Foucault. The last section of the thesis demonstrates how Orwell's personal experience drives his satire, and relates this specifically to a discussion of utopia / dystopia in satire. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Die Dialogiek van Satire: Fokuspunte en Breuke in Orwell se Animal Farm en Nineteen Eighty-Four: Hierdie proefskrif maak gebruik van Mikhail Bakhtin se teorie van dialogisme, sowel as die postmodernisme, om die breuke in satire bloot te le, en om die verskillende persepsies en diskoerse wat verband hou met die satire te ondersoek en te bevraagteken. Beide die dialogisme en die postmodernisme word gebruik om nuwe perspektiewe op satire te open, deur dit te herposisioneer in verhouding tot ander diskoerse en dit voor te stel in terme van 'n komplekse dinamika eerder as 'n geslote en onbuigsame sisteem. Die eerste hoofstuk van die proefskrif begin met 'n historiese oorsig van die oorspronge en daaropvolgende ontwikkeling van satire. Dit omvat ook 'n algemene bespreking van die aard van satiriese strateqiee en open die moontlikheid om postmodernistiese perspektiewe in die argument te integreer. Hoofstuk 2 kontrasteer die kwessies van moraliteit en representasie in satire met mekaar; daar word geargumenteer dat satirici nie net hulle gehore uitnooi om te veroordeel nie, maar hulle die geleentheid gee om alternatiewe werelde te ontdek. Die verwantskap tussen satire en postmodernisme word benadruk deur die postmodernisme se voorliefde vir die modi waaraan die satire so dikwels voorkeur gee: allegorie, parodie en fantasie. In hoofstuk 3 word die kwessie van taal en referensialiteit ondersoek, beginnende by Saussure se teorie oor die funksionering van die betekenaar en die betekende. Daar word geargumenteer dat satire nog nooit die vaste verhouding tussen betekenaar en betekende eerbiedig het nie, en dat dit in hierdie opsig verwant is aan die dekonstruksie. Die laaste gedeelte van die hoofstuk word gewy aan 'n ondersoek van vier sentrale sosio-politiese diskoerse - psigoanalise, ideologie, propaganda en politieke mitologie - in verhouding met satire. Hierdie vier diskoerse is, soos satire, daarop ingestel om mense se persepsies/opvattings van die. wereld te verander. Die doelstelling met die jukstaposisie van hierdie diskoerse is die skep van 'n dialogiese proses wat al vier hierdie diskoerse, insluitende satire, in 'n nuwe lig sal stel. Die genoemde sosio-politiese diskoerse speel 'n belangrike rol in Animal Farm en Nineteen Eighty-Four, en is relevant vir die daaropvolgende bespreking van die romans. Hoofstuk 4 bestaan uit 'n gedetailleerde bespreking van Animal Farm, waarin daar ondersoek ingestel word na die verskillende lae waaruit die roman bestaan. Die satiriese aspekte van die roman word in noue verband gebring met die fabulere en die feeverhaalelemente wat so 'n belangrike deel uitmaak van die roman se samestelling. Hierdie elemente of vlakke word gejukstaponeer met die historiese detail waarna daar deurlopend in Animal Farm verwys word en wat die noue bemoeienis met die wereld buite die roman aandui. Hoofstuk 5 bestaan uit 'n intensiewe ondersoek van Nineteen Eighty-Four, wat belig word deur 'n proses van dialogisme tussen die modernistiese ideologie waaruit die roman spruit en die postmodernistiese perspektiewe wat in die proefskrif ingevoer word. Die belangrikste postmodernistiese teoriee wat in hierdie hoofstuk gebruik word, is die van Foucault. Die laaste afdeling van die proefskrif demonstreer hoedat Orwell se persoonlike ervaring bepalend is vir sy satire en bring dit spesifiek in verband met 'n bespreking van utopie/distopie in satire.

This thesis examines stylistic technique and narrative strategy in a range of George Orwell’s fictional and non-fictional texts to demonstrate how personal experience and detached interpretation interact dialectically in his work to create layers of narrative complexity. Moving from Raymond Williams’ observation that the figure of “Orwell” is the writer’s “most successful” creation, this study asserts a vital correlation between form and content in Orwell’s work, specifically in the central position that perspective occupies in his political outlook. The multiple perspectives that surface in Orwell’s texts – the reluctant Imperial policeman, the tramp in disguise, the advocate of the working poor, the rebellious and satirically-inclined anti-totalitarian writer – correspond with the author’s life experiences, and yet are revealed as rhetorically constructed positions that are adopted strategically to generate nuanced, and at times contradictory, impressions of a wide range of subject matter. Chapter 1 treats Orwell’s Burmese writings as ethnographically-inflected texts; Chapter 2 examines the figure of the mask in Down and Out in Paris and London and in The Road to Wigan Pier; Chapter 3 analyses a dialectic of experience and interpretation at play in Homage to Catalonia; Chapter 4 scrutinizes the mobilization of the rebel writer figure in a selection of Orwell’s mature essays; and Chapter 5 examines the strategic deployment of competing perspectives in Nineteen Eighty-Four’s anatomy of the totalitarian state. This array of analytical approaches serves the dual function of highlighting the versatility and sophistication of narrative strategy across a range of individual texts in Orwell’s oeuvre, and of demonstrating a trajectory in his work that adheres simultaneously to both formal and political considerations. Orwell’s highly prolific two-decade-long writing career, I argue, can be productively understood as an ongoing experiment with narrative strategy, and this experiment exerts at each stage a direct influence on his evolving political aesthetic.

George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four, first published in 1949, is a vision of socialism gone wrong. The setting of Oceania is a world ruled over by an oligarchical collective, “The Party,” which wields absolute power through a formidable combination of surveillance technology and the operation of the principles of “panoptic control,” a concept drawn from Jeremy Bentham’s model prison design of the late 1700s and revived by Foucault in the mid 1970s. The combination of surveillance technology and panoptic control is central to the functioning of power in Orwell’s novel, a union which has created a self-sustaining form of totalitarianism dependent on the oppression of individual identity for its automatic perpetuation. This essay offers a reading of Nineteen Eighty-Four as an implicit critique of Bentham’s Panopticon which in many ways foreshadowed the later work of Michel Foucault on the functioning of power within this specific type of physical and social architecture. / George Orwells roman 1984, vilken publicerades första gången 1949, är en framtidsvision om socialism som gått fel. Romanen utspelas i Oceania, en värld som styrs av ett oligarkiskt kollektiv, “Partiet,” vilket utövar absolut makt genom en utstuderad kombination av övervakningsteknik och teorin om “panoptisk” kontroll, ett begrepp sprunget ur av Jeremy Benthams fängelsemodell från sent 1700-tal, vilket återskapades av Michel Foucault i mitten av 1970-talet. Kombinationen av övervakningsteknologi och panopticism har i Oceanien skapat en totalitarianism som fungerar med automatik och förtrycker individuell identitet för att befästa statens makt. Denna uppsats närmar sig Orwells 1984 som en underförstådd kritik av Benthams arbete. Vidare identifier i romanen 1984 många av Foucault’s idéer om hur makt fungerar i en panoptisk struktur.

No description available.

The thesis aims to give an overview of the treatment of media in texts that have formed modern dystopian writing and to which new additions in the genre necessarily relate. This set of texts consists of George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four, Aldous Huxley's Brave New World and When the Sleeper Awakes by H. G. Wells; first chapter substantiates this selection and proceeds to define the concepts of "media" and "dystopia". Second chapter is concerned with the understanding of history in dystopian societies and shows that the very concept of historicity is undesirable for a totalitarian state, which seeks to blur history and reduce it to a three-point schema "before the Event - the Event (revolution) - after the Event". Closer analysis then shows that the Event itself can be divided into a further triad that has to be completed in order to pass into eternal post-Event society. Third chapter describes the use of citizens as media and shows that while Huxley's society uses what Michel Foucault calls "biopower" to achieve this goal, Orwell's society rather uses the concept of "discipline". Fourth chapter turns to printed media a the privileged role they are ascribed in the novels: The authors see literature as an embodiment of individuality and, at the same time, as a guarantee of tradition established by an...

Os primeiros textos do escritor inglês George Orwell consideram o apelo do ideário comunista, ao passo que seus dois últimos romances, A Revolução dos Bichos (publicado em 1946) e 1984 (publicado em 1949) se contrapõem radicalmente a esse regime. Ao longo da segunda metade do século XX, foi-se estabelecendo a mística de uma forte ligação entre a obra de Orwell e o histórico do regime comunista, de modo que, com a queda do Comunismo, o desinteresse pelo assunto parece haver provocado uma diminuição no conceito dos méritos do escritor. O argumento da presente dissertação é que estamos frente a um momento nevrálgico no desenrolar da fortuna crítica de George Orwell, no qual a leitura alegórica feita até aqui deve ser substituída pela leitura simbólica, para que os textos do autor possam transcender à derrocada do movimento Comunista, sustentando-se na estética de sua literariedade e na atemporalidade de seu apelo ético. Em outras palavras, não é o texto de Orwell que precisa ser mudado, e sim, o ângulo de abordagem daqueles que constroem a fortuna crítica do autor, pois as referências temporais desgastadas diminuem a potencialidade interpretativa das obras. Um ponto comum que permanece, e que transpassa a obra literária de Orwell, é a opressão exercida por quaisquer sistemas políticos que possam ter atitudes consideradas totalitárias. Esta observação não remete apenas ao sistema comunista, mas também ao imperialista, ao autocrático, e até mesmo ao democrático. Orwell demonstra que um sistema não é totalitário por si só, mas através de suas atitudes em relação ao povo. Se, na época de seus lançamentos, a temática totalitária foi relacionada ao comunismo, tomando-se os textos como alegorias irreversíveis do discurso anti-comunista, a queda daquele regime, ou sua gradual abertura a práticas capitalistas, não basta para condenar as obras de Orwell ao anacronismo, descartando maiores possibilidades interpretativas. Ao propor uma releitura de A Revolução dos Bichos e 1984 substituindo as referências ao comunismo por qualquer tipo de prática totalitária — e concentrar o foco das observações no que é simbólico, ao invés de alegórico — acredito estar cumprindo minha parte neste processo de resgate da fortuna crítica de um escritor que considero ser um dos mais honestos e competentes de seu tempo. / The first texts of the English writer George Orwell approach the appeal of Communist views; however, his two last novels, Animal Farm (published in 1946) and Nineteen Eighty-Four (published in 1949) radically oppose this regime. Along the second half of the 20th century , strong bonds were established between Orwell’s works and the history of the Communist regime, however, with the fall of Communism, the lack of interest for the subject seems to have generated a diminution in the merits and recognition of the writer. The argumentation of this thesis is that we have been facing a central moment in the unfolding of George Orwell’s critical heritage, in which the allegorical reading done so far must be replaced by the symbolical reading, so that the texts of the author can transcend the fall of the Communist movement, supported by the esthetic of the literariety and atemporality of their ethic appeal. In other words, it is not the text of Orwell which must be changed, but the angle of the approach of those who build the author’s critical heritage, because outdated temporal references impair the interpretative possibility of the works. A remaining point that seems to cross all Orwell’s literary works is the oppression exerted by any political systems that can have attitudes considered totalitarian ones. This remark does not address only the Communist system, but also the Imperialist, the autocratic and even the Democratic ones. Orwell demonstrates that a system is not totalitarian on its own, but through its manifestations towards people. If, at the age of their launchings, the totalitarian theme was connected to Communism, taking the texts as irreversible allegories of the anti-Communist discourse, the fall of that regime, or its gradual opening to Capitalist practices, is not enough to condemn Orwell’s works to anachronism, discharging more comprehensive interpretative possibilities. I believe that, by proposing a new reading of Animal Farm and Nineteen Eighty-Four, replacing the references to Communism for references to any kind of totalitarian practice--, and concentrating the focus of the observation on what is symbolical – I will be doing my part in this process of rescuing the critical heritage of a writer who I consider one of the most honest and competent authors of his time.

The aim of this essay is to provide an answer to the question "What is the Meaning of Meaningless sex in Dystopia?". It will show that meaningful concepts such as sexual satisfaction, pleassure, passion, love, bonding, procreation and family are handled as threats in dystopian societies described in well-known novels as We, Brave New World and Nineteen Eighty-Four . It will explain how the conflict between the collective and the individual influences peoples' sexuality. It will also show how leading powers in the three dystopian societies use different methods to remove the significanse and functions of sex. It will suggest meaningless sex is a means to control the masses in a collective and that meaningful sex is an act of rebelion against the state. / .

Os primeiros textos do escritor inglês George Orwell consideram o apelo do ideário comunista, ao passo que seus dois últimos romances, A Revolução dos Bichos (publicado em 1946) e 1984 (publicado em 1949) se contrapõem radicalmente a esse regime. Ao longo da segunda metade do século XX, foi-se estabelecendo a mística de uma forte ligação entre a obra de Orwell e o histórico do regime comunista, de modo que, com a queda do Comunismo, o desinteresse pelo assunto parece haver provocado uma diminuição no conceito dos méritos do escritor. O argumento da presente dissertação é que estamos frente a um momento nevrálgico no desenrolar da fortuna crítica de George Orwell, no qual a leitura alegórica feita até aqui deve ser substituída pela leitura simbólica, para que os textos do autor possam transcender à derrocada do movimento Comunista, sustentando-se na estética de sua literariedade e na atemporalidade de seu apelo ético. Em outras palavras, não é o texto de Orwell que precisa ser mudado, e sim, o ângulo de abordagem daqueles que constroem a fortuna crítica do autor, pois as referências temporais desgastadas diminuem a potencialidade interpretativa das obras. Um ponto comum que permanece, e que transpassa a obra literária de Orwell, é a opressão exercida por quaisquer sistemas políticos que possam ter atitudes consideradas totalitárias. Esta observação não remete apenas ao sistema comunista, mas também ao imperialista, ao autocrático, e até mesmo ao democrático. Orwell demonstra que um sistema não é totalitário por si só, mas através de suas atitudes em relação ao povo. Se, na época de seus lançamentos, a temática totalitária foi relacionada ao comunismo, tomando-se os textos como alegorias irreversíveis do discurso anti-comunista, a queda daquele regime, ou sua gradual abertura a práticas capitalistas, não basta para condenar as obras de Orwell ao anacronismo, descartando maiores possibilidades interpretativas. Ao propor uma releitura de A Revolução dos Bichos e 1984 substituindo as referências ao comunismo por qualquer tipo de prática totalitária — e concentrar o foco das observações no que é simbólico, ao invés de alegórico — acredito estar cumprindo minha parte neste processo de resgate da fortuna crítica de um escritor que considero ser um dos mais honestos e competentes de seu tempo. / The first texts of the English writer George Orwell approach the appeal of Communist views; however, his two last novels, Animal Farm (published in 1946) and Nineteen Eighty-Four (published in 1949) radically oppose this regime. Along the second half of the 20th century , strong bonds were established between Orwell’s works and the history of the Communist regime, however, with the fall of Communism, the lack of interest for the subject seems to have generated a diminution in the merits and recognition of the writer. The argumentation of this thesis is that we have been facing a central moment in the unfolding of George Orwell’s critical heritage, in which the allegorical reading done so far must be replaced by the symbolical reading, so that the texts of the author can transcend the fall of the Communist movement, supported by the esthetic of the literariety and atemporality of their ethic appeal. In other words, it is not the text of Orwell which must be changed, but the angle of the approach of those who build the author’s critical heritage, because outdated temporal references impair the interpretative possibility of the works. A remaining point that seems to cross all Orwell’s literary works is the oppression exerted by any political systems that can have attitudes considered totalitarian ones. This remark does not address only the Communist system, but also the Imperialist, the autocratic and even the Democratic ones. Orwell demonstrates that a system is not totalitarian on its own, but through its manifestations towards people. If, at the age of their launchings, the totalitarian theme was connected to Communism, taking the texts as irreversible allegories of the anti-Communist discourse, the fall of that regime, or its gradual opening to Capitalist practices, is not enough to condemn Orwell’s works to anachronism, discharging more comprehensive interpretative possibilities. I believe that, by proposing a new reading of Animal Farm and Nineteen Eighty-Four, replacing the references to Communism for references to any kind of totalitarian practice--, and concentrating the focus of the observation on what is symbolical – I will be doing my part in this process of rescuing the critical heritage of a writer who I consider one of the most honest and competent authors of his time.

Os primeiros textos do escritor inglês George Orwell consideram o apelo do ideário comunista, ao passo que seus dois últimos romances, A Revolução dos Bichos (publicado em 1946) e 1984 (publicado em 1949) se contrapõem radicalmente a esse regime. Ao longo da segunda metade do século XX, foi-se estabelecendo a mística de uma forte ligação entre a obra de Orwell e o histórico do regime comunista, de modo que, com a queda do Comunismo, o desinteresse pelo assunto parece haver provocado uma diminuição no conceito dos méritos do escritor. O argumento da presente dissertação é que estamos frente a um momento nevrálgico no desenrolar da fortuna crítica de George Orwell, no qual a leitura alegórica feita até aqui deve ser substituída pela leitura simbólica, para que os textos do autor possam transcender à derrocada do movimento Comunista, sustentando-se na estética de sua literariedade e na atemporalidade de seu apelo ético. Em outras palavras, não é o texto de Orwell que precisa ser mudado, e sim, o ângulo de abordagem daqueles que constroem a fortuna crítica do autor, pois as referências temporais desgastadas diminuem a potencialidade interpretativa das obras. Um ponto comum que permanece, e que transpassa a obra literária de Orwell, é a opressão exercida por quaisquer sistemas políticos que possam ter atitudes consideradas totalitárias. Esta observação não remete apenas ao sistema comunista, mas também ao imperialista, ao autocrático, e até mesmo ao democrático. Orwell demonstra que um sistema não é totalitário por si só, mas através de suas atitudes em relação ao povo. Se, na época de seus lançamentos, a temática totalitária foi relacionada ao comunismo, tomando-se os textos como alegorias irreversíveis do discurso anti-comunista, a queda daquele regime, ou sua gradual abertura a práticas capitalistas, não basta para condenar as obras de Orwell ao anacronismo, descartando maiores possibilidades interpretativas. Ao propor uma releitura de A Revolução dos Bichos e 1984 substituindo as referências ao comunismo por qualquer tipo de prática totalitária — e concentrar o foco das observações no que é simbólico, ao invés de alegórico — acredito estar cumprindo minha parte neste processo de resgate da fortuna crítica de um escritor que considero ser um dos mais honestos e competentes de seu tempo. / The first texts of the English writer George Orwell approach the appeal of Communist views; however, his two last novels, Animal Farm (published in 1946) and Nineteen Eighty-Four (published in 1949) radically oppose this regime. Along the second half of the 20th century , strong bonds were established between Orwell’s works and the history of the Communist regime, however, with the fall of Communism, the lack of interest for the subject seems to have generated a diminution in the merits and recognition of the writer. The argumentation of this thesis is that we have been facing a central moment in the unfolding of George Orwell’s critical heritage, in which the allegorical reading done so far must be replaced by the symbolical reading, so that the texts of the author can transcend the fall of the Communist movement, supported by the esthetic of the literariety and atemporality of their ethic appeal. In other words, it is not the text of Orwell which must be changed, but the angle of the approach of those who build the author’s critical heritage, because outdated temporal references impair the interpretative possibility of the works. A remaining point that seems to cross all Orwell’s literary works is the oppression exerted by any political systems that can have attitudes considered totalitarian ones. This remark does not address only the Communist system, but also the Imperialist, the autocratic and even the Democratic ones. Orwell demonstrates that a system is not totalitarian on its own, but through its manifestations towards people. If, at the age of their launchings, the totalitarian theme was connected to Communism, taking the texts as irreversible allegories of the anti-Communist discourse, the fall of that regime, or its gradual opening to Capitalist practices, is not enough to condemn Orwell’s works to anachronism, discharging more comprehensive interpretative possibilities. I believe that, by proposing a new reading of Animal Farm and Nineteen Eighty-Four, replacing the references to Communism for references to any kind of totalitarian practice--, and concentrating the focus of the observation on what is symbolical – I will be doing my part in this process of rescuing the critical heritage of a writer who I consider one of the most honest and competent authors of his time.

Nineteen Eighty-Four de George Orwell, A Clockwork Orange d'Anthony Burgess et Meccania: The Superstate d'Owen Gregory révèlent trois régimes oppressifs qui manipulent la science dans le but de contrôler leurs populations. Les auteurs dénoncent la déshumanisation et l'esclavage générés par cette collaboration politico-scientifique. Ainsi, cette étude va explorer les dystopies susmentionnées en analysant leur critique du mariage politico-scientifique. Je vais montrer que la coopération entre les politiciens et les scientifiques est destinée à contrôler les individus et à pénaliser les éléments dissidents. Je vais examiner les mécanismes politico-scientifiques de surveillance et de punition, tout en montrant que les politiciens usent de la science pour assurer la continuité et la stabilité des régimes tyranniques. Finalement, je vais souligner la capacité de l'écriture à dévoiler les abus politico-scientifiques, et à prévenir une coalition entre la connaissance scientifique et le pouvoir despotique.