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.

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.

This thesis argues that a socially conservative tendency informed much of George Orwell's commentary between 1934 and 1943, and that the same tendency reflected a general European trend. The main sources of this thesis are a large selection of George Orwell's works and a smaller selection of works by Frantz Fanon, Jose Ortega y Gasset, and Antonio Gramsci. This thesis relies upon Orwell's involvement in the Spanish Civil War between 1936 and 1937 and his embrace of nationalism in 1940 as major organizational points of reference. This thesis concludes that Orwell's commentary was an example of a general European conservative reaction against Marxist-Leninist thought.

Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) / Nineteen Eighty-Four has become a hallmark example of the first, great cautionary sociological and political dystopias of the postwar era. Over the last sixty years, literary critics have thoroughly studied the plot, setting, characters, themes, scenes, subliminal meanings, and overt meanings of this text. However, very few critics have utilized one of the most precious resources available for analysis of Orwell’s creative process – the surviving, but fragmented, stages of early composition. In order to understand the full significance of these pages, it is necessary to illuminate the presubmission history of Nineteen Eighty-Four from the point at which George Orwell began composition to the date of press submission – a span of roughly twenty-nine months, from the summer of 1946 to November 1948, when Orwell’s British publisher, Secker and Warburg, received the typesetting copy. Nineteen Eighty-Four, his final work, is also the sole Orwell novel where manuscript stages are known to survive. The submitted typescript survives in the Orwell Archives at University College in London, and its underlayer reflects the fullest development of Nineteen Eighty-Four under Orwell’s unmediated hand. Although the 1947 manuscript is a conglomeration of hand written pages, typed pages, hand corrected pages, and type corrected pages, it is vital that literary and textual criticism focus on what the manuscript reveals about Orwell’s development of the narrative structure and text.

Informe final de Seminario de Grado para optar al grado de Licenciado en Lengua y Literatura Inglesas / Facultad de Filosofía y Humanidades / George Orwell is most popularly known because of his novels dealing with the issue of totalitarian governments or states: Animal Farm and Nineteen Eighty-Four. The former, deals with the topic by means of satire; while the latter, deals with it by means of a dystopia. Orwell‟s dystopia, which is the novel to be studied in this graduate thesis paper, is set in London, in the year 1984. It has been more than twenty-five years form that date, however the threats of a state of that kind and, the worst all, the many reflections of the novel in our society have not disappeared, nor, perhaps, diminished. In the following work, I will study the issue of places and non-places in Nineteen Eighty-Four. Evidently, it is not my intention to analyse all places and non-places present in this novel but mainly one, which is, from my perspective, the room Winston rents to the fake antique dealer. For this purpose, I will analyse selected passages and episodes from the object novel of this thesis, Orwell‟s Nineteen Eighty-Four, especially those that relate with Winston‟s experiences in the city and the room.

Ce mémoire porte sur la figure de l'intelligence artificielle, en ce qu'elle permet d'incarner les craintes et les angoisses mises au jour par la critique sociale véhiculée dans les fictions dystopiques. Il analyse les manifestations d'êtres-machines et de structures de contrôle social créés par l'humanité, et dont la conduite témoigne d'une forme d'intelligence; il montre ainsi en quoi certaines structures sociales se calquent sur les machines pensantes imaginées. S'appuyant sur une approche pluridisciplinaire qui fait notamment appel aux domaines de la cybernétique, de la biologie et de la science politique, cette étude de la dystopie se concentre plus particulièrement sur le corpus littéraire suivant: Nineteen Eighty-Four, de George Orwell, Le Dépeupleur, de Samuel Beckett, et Neuromancer, de William Gibson. Prenant ses racines dans l'utopie, la dystopie a été façonnée au XIXe siècle à partir des craintes et des désillusions liées à une industrialisation qui modifiait radicalement le mode de vie humain. Dans ce type de fictions, les rapports de force entre l'humanité et ses outils -ses créations -basculent, car la technique y permet la transmission d'un ascendant sur l'être humain. Cette emprise se voit exacerbée par la machine pensante, dont l'accession à la vie autorise un niveau d'indépendance et d'initiative inaccessible à ses prédécesseurs. Ce faisant, l'intelligence artificielle permet d'imager le déplacement de point focal qui s'opère quand l'outil devient une fin en soi, de même qu'elle illustre les potentialités asservissantes d'une utilisation inconsidérée de la technique. À l'image de l'être artificiel, les structures machiniques de la dystopie acquièrent suffisamment d'autonomie pour pouvoir, elles aussi, attenter à la souveraineté de l'individu. L'humain, noyé au sein de ces structures qui le submergent, n'est alors plus qu'une composante insignifiante dont la spécificité se fait systématiquement gommer par la machine sociale. En définitive, qu'il s'agisse d'un être ou d'un système, la figure de l'intelligence artificielle apparaît comme un sujet agissant, qui incarne la propension de la dystopie à réduire l'individu à l'état de pion. ______________________________________________________________________________ MOTS-CLÉS DE L’AUTEUR : Dystopie, Intelligence artificielle, Cybernétique, George Orwell, Samuel Beckett, William Gibson.

Dans une perspective de l'histoire intellectuelle, notre étude traite, par une approche comparative, de l'engagement des écrivains Albert Camus (1913-1960) et George Orwell (1903-1950). Notre recherche vise à mettre l'accent sur la notion de responsabilité dans l'engagement des deux auteurs. Cette dimension, qui est perceptible dans tous les combats dont George Orwell et Albert Camus ont pris part dans la première moitié du 20e siècle, est perçue par nous comme une caractéristique qui ne fut pas partagée par beaucoup d'intellectuels en Europe à la même époque. En situant le parcours des deux auteurs dans le contexte historique de la période européenne s'étalant de l'entre-deux-guerre au début de la guerre froide, nous démontrerons que la pensée et le parcours engagé de Camus et d'Orwell comportent de nombreuses similitudes. Par l'analyse de leurs écrits, essais, articles de journaux et correspondances, qui s'avèrent des témoignages directs de la guerre civile espagnole, de la Deuxième Guerre mondiale ainsi que du début de la guerre froide, notre étude a pour objectif d'établir la concordance de leur engagement. Nous allons également vérifier que leur engagement était de nature socialiste et qu'il se distinguait de la majorité de ceux de leurs contemporains par son caractère antistaliniste. En procédant tout d'abord à l'analyse de leur influence ainsi que de leur expérience respective, nous allons examiner d'une façon théorique leur écrit ainsi que leur critique des idéologies radicales tels l'impérialisme, le fascisme, le nazisme et le stalinisme. Cette approche nous permettra de faire ressortir les valeurs pour lesquelles Camus et Orwell ont combattu tout au long de leur vie. Ces valeurs sont le combat pour la vérité, la lutte pour la sauvegarde de la liberté et la recherche d'une solution socialiste démocratique et non dogmatique. Bien que de nationalité et de culture différente (Camus étant Français et Orwell Britannique), le témoignage engagé et socialiste des deux auteurs est une courageuse démonstration de la survie d'une conscience indépendante et responsable au moment où l'Europe succombe à une « intoxication » idéologique sans précédent. ______________________________________________________________________________ MOTS-CLÉS DE L’AUTEUR : Deuxième Guerre mondiale, Engagement, Europe, Idéologie, Socialisme, Totalitarisme, 20e siècle.

Thesis (M.A.)--York University, 2004. Graduate Programme in Interdisciplinary Studies. / Typescript. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 137-144). Also available on the Internet. MODE OF ACCESS via web browser by entering the following URL: http://gateway.proquest.com/openurl?url%5Fver=Z39.88-2004&res%5Fdat=xri:pqdiss &rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:dissertation&rft_dat=xri:pqdiss:MR11760

The topic of this diploma thesis is the antiutopia and totalism in the Czech and world cinematography and it elaborates the proposal of an artistic approach to the film Nineteen Eighty-Four based on the novel by George Orwell. The theoretical part of this thesis deals with the definition of the relationship between antiutopia and totalitarianism, their characteristic features and how they manifest themselves in the cinema. This phenomenon is discussed in more detail in the folowing analysis of selected films in terms of their visual and production values. The second part of this thesis looks into the artistic approach to the film. The concept elaborates an urban design as well as individual exterior and interior sets and proposal of their designing.