1984: Ignorance is Strength

SUMMARY: George Orwell’s 1984  follows the protagonist Winston Smith and his life living in the totalitarian superstate, Oceana, where the Party, led by the all-powerful “Big Brother”, controls everyone and everything in society including independent thought, lifestyle, and history. 

---

A classic novel about a corrupt government system constantly surveilling its citizens, forcing them to live by a strict daily schedule, and then not only withholding but constantly censoring important parts of their history from them, is ironically one of many books being censored from society today. But why? 

The motto restated throughout George Orwell’s chilling dystopian 1984 is as follows:

WAR IS PEACE

FREEDOM IS SLAVERY

IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

All contradictory of the moral standards we live by today as a society, right?

That’s what I thought the first time I saw this line, but as I continued reading, it became clear to me that the cryptic slogan – more specifically the last line of it – being repeated to me wasn’t so far off from how some people function in society today. 

In my experience reading it, I interpreted the book almost as a warning, one that many people weren’t acknowledging either on purpose or because they simply couldn’t recognize it. That was a really interesting factor I took into consideration throughout my research of this book’s banning and all the others that I’ve looked into. 

Challenged in various states and around the world, 1984 has been restricted for an ongoing list of reasons. A very common one is that the novel contains “explicit” sexual content, and in the southern United States another one thrown around is “pro-communist themes.” 

I didn’t necessarily view it as “pro-communist” but rather a pro-democracy narrative in the sense that the main character spends the entire novel fighting for his own independent thought, similar to how this book has to fight for its opportunity to get it’s message out. 

As for the explicit sexual content aspect, I have come to regard that term in the context of book banning as an intellectually shallow excuse to cover up the true reasoning behind why a specific work is challenged. To me, it seems like a quick fix to get people on board with the idea of something being unfit for educational and seemingly sophisticated environments without giving much context if any at all. 

My core belief is that the publicized reasoning for book banning is often contorted compared to the reality of why, and as I dug deeper I found additional reasons that made more sense. Two being political criticism and anti-authoritarian themes. 

Those reasons are definitely more prominent in other countries, but I feel that if those two reasons intimidate people enough to restrict something from public access then maybe the problem isn’t actually with the book. 

After gathering all the information, I’ve come to this conclusion: 

Ignorance in others can make those in charge feel not only stronger but safer. That’s what ultimately keeps people in control and secure in their position; having influence over other’s beliefs and personal values creates an illusion of harmony that makes all appear “correct.”

That theme, from the first novel I chose to focus on, is something I’ve been able to recognize across almost everything I’ve interacted with since; and the message of the importance of independent thought has never been more clear. 

The book’s warning stems from the plea to recognize the dangers of totalitarianism and mass surveillance, and continuously circling back to Oceana’s motto to point this out simultaneously encourages readers to approach 1984 with curiosity and critical thinking rather than dismissing it because it may trigger discomfort. 

What makes literature valuable is not that it agrees with us all the time, but that it motivates us to question, analyze, and – above all else – think for ourselves.