Skip to main content

Will the Party lose steam?

In terms of optimistic book passages, I can't say this one is at the top of my list. Basically what we learned from chapters III-V of Part Three is that the Party will rule the world for all of eternity, and there is no situation in which they will not succeed. Winston protests when O'Brien tells him this, arguing that the Party will self-destruct at some point, or at least some spiritual force in the universe will prevent the eternal rule of the Party. However, O'Brien just mocks Winston. O'Brien makes a very convincing case for the Party, but there is one potential loophole that could topple the Party - decreasing devotion to the cause. 

In revolutions, the most passionate generation is the one that actually revolts (obviously). In 1984, that is the group that is currently running the Party. However, as authoritarian regimes pass down through the generations, this revolutionary fervor dies down, and those in power either loosen their grip enough to destabilize themselves or tighten their grip so much that there is widespread outrage and they are overthrown. Even though O'Brien seems confident in the Party's strategy of becoming more and more controlling, there is no guarantee that future Inner Party members will stick to this plan correctly. I wouldn't be surprised if this revolutionary generation passes down its cockiness without the devotion to precision required to back it up. 

What do you guys think? Will the Party hold on forever, like O'Brien says? Or is their collapse only a matter of time?

Comments

  1. Ooh, great question. I am not an optimistic person by nature, but I do think their collapse is only a matter of time. Species and systems evolve, change, and adapt by nature, or they disappear. At some point enough people will be tired of that boiled cabbage smell and will realize they have nothing to lose by trying to change things.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This is a good point that I hadn't thought about. My best response is that we won't be able to tell. The only perspective that we get on this is Winston's fevered rebellion and O'Brien's equally fevered counter. Theoretically, if the Inner Party's current members are able to pick and groom future members with the same kind of devotion, the system won't fail. I'm not sure if we should characterize the Party as vulnerable to human error, because we have never seen that to be the case. I'm sure that is what Orwell intended. TL;DR -- I have no idea.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I think that their collapse is inevitable, if not for the reasons you've mentioned about the Party losing a willing audience, then the Proles (who make up an unreasonably high percentage of the population) must have some realization at some point, right? Sure they have thoughtpolice on the Proles too, but you don't necessarily have to be "smart" to start a revolution.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I think a collapse could be possible at some point. It's only been, what, 40 or 50 years so far? I feel like a collapse from inside seems more likely than a revolution from the outside though. The proles don't look like having the motivation to revolt, even as the Party rule changes hands. The cockiness is certainly still within the Party though, and I could see the Party slowly fall apart. Though I think it would take a significant time, as the further away from the original controlling generation, the more likely the rulers will ease off.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Nothing lasts forever (yay! Nihilism!), so I can only imagine that someday, somehow, the Party will run out of steam and be toppled. However, the Party has done a phenomenal job indoctrinating children into their system to the point where Winston thinks they're the most dangerous of all Party members, so Big Brother may last longer than totalitarian regimes have tended to in real life. However, like you said, it's totally possible that someday, a generation will fail to press the necessary reverence of Big Brother onto their successors, and that will bring the Party down. I don't think that will happen in the generation after 1984, but eventually it might.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I want to say that the Party will collapse, because nothing, especially not societies, last forever. However, they've held on for quite a while and their power is only growing (as seen by the victory in the end of the book), so there's a chance they will prevail.

    ReplyDelete
  7. The collapse is probably inevitable for the reasons you mentioned. After all why would children brought up in the next generations care about "power" just for its own sake? I could be wrong, but I feel that later on, people will lack fervor for the Party unless they keep editing history and the public actually believes it.

    ReplyDelete
  8. It does seem likely to me that as the Party goes on, the generations ruling it will be more and more lax, to the point of allowing certain things to go on with no punishment. The important thing is that as the top becomes more and more corrupt or more and more careless, the system will collapse on its own.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I'd like to believe that change is inevitable and that the natural motivation for people to constantly improve and challenge what could be made better will help accelerate that collapse. It's impossible for one system to work for so long without any changes being made, especially as time progresses and different needs must be addressed.

    ReplyDelete
  10. This is a great question. Obviously, Orwell intentionally made the ending ambiguous, but in my opinion, the Party's rule will eventually end. Maybe they'll be overthrown by an external or internal uprising, maybe their enemies will defeat them in a war, maybe their tactics will simply stop working as time progresses and people change, or maybe they'll become overconfident/careless and start making mistakes (their control over the proles is already relatively lax). Nothing lasts forever.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Although Orwell leaves us at a very weird point in the book where the Party has ultimately succeeded, I do think the Party's rule will end. It may take some time, but I completely agree with your point that decreasing devotion for the cause will impact this dystopian regime in future years.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

How Disney perpetuates voodoo stereotypes

In the opening chapters of Mumbo Jumbo , we've been introduced to Papa DaBas, a voodoo priest. In class we talked a bit about the largely negatively perception of voodoo in America. This immediately made me think of the Disney princess film, The Princess and the Frog . This movie is set in New Orleans, and follows a princess who falls in love, blah blah blah...but the villain is a voodoo-practicing witch doctor, Dr. Facilier.  I found it really interesting to look back at Dr. Facilier's character after discussing the American perception of voodoo, because Dr. Facilier is portrayed as a man of pure evil (here's a picture if you haven't seen the movie to show how creepy he is). His soul belongs to evil loas (his "friends on the other side", as he calls them), and he uses their power to achieve his greedy  goals, convincing the loas to continue working with him by feeding them the souls of innocent victims. He's manipulative and extremely powerful.  ...

Paul D and Sethe's shared trauma

Paul D and Sethe have an extremely complicated relationship that constantly morphs and shifts throughout  Beloved . They spent lots of time at Sweet Home together, and therefore have an established emotional bond. Though a more physical aspect of their relationship develops, the glue holding them together is their shared trauma of living at Sweet Home and of their respective escapes. Generally speaking, relationships held together primarily by shared traumatic experiences are fragile and unstable: Paul D and Sethe's relationship is no exception. Though they understand each other's experiences with slavery, they have little else in common. Crucially, they haven't seen each other in eighteen years, and there are significant gaps in their knowledge what has happened in the other's life in the nearly two decades since their last encounter. Most importantly, Paul D is unaware of what Sethe did in the shed on that fateful day when schoolmaster came to 124. With the presen...

Final thoughts

 Before I get into this, I want to start by pointing out that Jill was #1 on my most likely to die list, and she is the one who died. It feels wrong to congratulate myself, but I am a little bit proud. The ending was quite satisfying. It felt almost too good and peaceful for the end of such a wild and tragic novel. Nearly the entire group survived, they moved on from their ghosts of the past, and they have great resources that they can begin their Earthseed community with. I'm a little upset that Lauren is still in a relationship with Bankole, but it's good that there are so many relationships within their community as they plan for the future. The most surprising part of the ending was when Lauren discovered that Greyson, Emery, and their kids are all sharers. I was not expecting this at all, because sharing was Lauren's most unique trait. However, it does alienate her less from the rest of the group, and it makes the former slaves more united with the rest of the group. T...