y\.t Easc- TTYie iiatialion. _
Friday, December 2, 1983
Professor says '1984' not here
by Bonnie Langford
Battalion staff
When George Orwell chose
the title "1984" for his book, he
apparently had nothing specific
in mind. The date merely was
the reverse of the year in which
he was writing: 1948.
But the dramatic and lasting
impact of the book turned 1984
into a sinister symbol of a society
gone awry. And now 1984 is
only days away.
The book has become a popu
lar addition in college courses
across the nation. At Texas
A&M, Dr. Richard Costa is us
ing it as one of the two major
works of fiction studied in his
English 103 honors class.
"I wanted a book that would
shake people up, one that builds
around the ideas of obedience
and disobedience," he says.
"Students are too willing to
accept what they are told with
out questioning it, as do the
characters in '1984'. And of
course, the fact that next year is
1984 made it very tempting to
pick the book."
Although the year creeps omi
nously closer, Costa says that
most of the events foretold in the
book haven't yet come true in
the United States.
"I don't believe that '1984' is
here in the U.S. yet," he says,
"but I wanted to get the students
looking ahead and trying to see
what tendencies might surface
in the future."
People in the United States
can live without the fear of being
monitored with screens and
without the fear of being caught
writing in a diary because it's
against the law, but Costa says
he feels Americans have become
complacent about other coun
tries.
"We settle for geographic dis
tance and are not emotionally
involved in Beirut or Afghanis
tan," he says. "We can't allow
the geographic distance to serve
as a telescreen or a distorting de
vice, as in '1984'."
Not caring about people who
are in different countries is one
danger that the United States
must change, Costa says. Amer
ica is beginning to live in its own
Oceania, he says. This isolation
ism has cropped up previously.
It was a problem before World
War II.
"Despite the fact we're in a
recession and the unemploy
ment rate is high," he says,
"there is money and we are well-
off. It'snot as bad as it could be."
Costa says people in the Un
ited State are more fortunate
than those dwelling in Oceania
because no one is under the
threat of being vaporized. Rep
ression or the threat of rewritten
history doesn't exist, he says,
but that is not the case in other
countries.
"There are places where
'1984' does exist," he says.
"There are people in Afghanis
tan and Argentina who are im
prisoned and then disappear.
We're very fortunate that we can
still determine the characteris
tics of our own lifes."
One of Costa's assignments
"I don't believe that'1984'.
but 1 wanted to get the students looking ahead
to see what tendencies might surlacein
/
Orwellian society not
reflected in real 1984
by Angel Stokes
Battalion staff
"Progress in our world will be
progress toward more pain ...
there will be no emotions except
fear, rage, triumph, and self-
abasement ... everything else
we will destroy ...we have cut
links between child and parent
... there will be no wives and no
friends ... the sex instinct will
become eradicated ... procrea
tion will be an annual formahty
like the renewal of a ration card
...no loyalty, except loyalty to
the party ...no love, except the
love of Big Brother ..."
That's 1984, according to
George Orwell's book. In
"1984" society is an extension of
the state — a state that has com
plete control.
In Oceania, the setting for
"1984," sex is utilitarian, inde
pendent thought or emotion is
illegal and Big Brother is watch
ing you all the time. The Junior
Anti-Sex League advocates com
plete celibacy for both sexes.
Eventually, all children would
be created through artifical in
semination.
In Orwell's book, the family
— subservient to the Party —
exists only to have children.
Husbands and wives are
approved by the Party before a
marriage takes place. The chil
dren are sent to school and are
trained to be spies for the Party.
But today's American society
— with 1984 just a few weeks
away — isn't much like Orwell
predicted when he wrote the
book in 1948.
Instead, people have more
freedom to express themselves
and their emotions, and the
family still is a functioning unit.
Three theories exist today ab
out the relationship between
family and state, Burk says.
These are: the family is subser
vient to the state, the state is
subservient to the family and
the state and the family are com-
pletely separate from one
another.
In the U.S. the state is subser
vient to the family, he says. But
all three theories exist in society
now. The theory of greatest con
troversy is the third, he says.
An example is a parent's deci
sion to withhold medical treat
ment for children with terminal
illnesses and the government
steps in. In cases like this, pa
rents may feel that the state
should stay out and remain
separate from the decision.
The family unit is not the only
thing that differs from Orwell's
1984 as compared to the real
1984.
Over the past 50 years or so,
people have become more sex
ually liberal, says Dr. James
Burk, a Texas A&M sociologist.
Since the end of World War II,
an increase in sexual freedom
has occurred. However, he says
1980 values are more traditional
than the early 70s but more li
beral than the '60s.
But, can groups like the Moral
Majority be compared to the
Junior Anti-Sex League that
Orwell envisioned?
Burk says the Moral Majority
and other groups aren't trying to
change morality. The groups
want to affirm what they think is
traditional morality, he says, in
stead of a world where sexual
practice is a matter of licentious
ness or wholly utilitarian.
"They (the groups) over
react," Burk says. "Americans
aren't licentious and they aren't
utilitarian either."
Religious groups are increas
ing their efforts in public affairs,
Burk says. The authority of the
church over public affairs is
much less now than 100 or 200
years ago. But the institutional
authority of the church is down
— but not out, he says.
Orwell created a society with
out religion. God and Satan ex
isted in the guise of ever-
watchful Big Brother. The Party
slogans were the religious doc
trines.
Burk says he doesn't think it's
possible for a society to exist
without some type of transcen
dental beliefs.
for his students included writ
ing an essay comparing Orwell's
book to other anti-Utopian
books. He chose 10 essays for a
class casebook.
The casebook, called the
Future in Peril: '1984' and the
Anti-Utopians," includes essays
on such science fiction greats as
Isaac Asimov, Arthur C. Clarke
and Kurt Vonnegut Jr.
Tim Grose, a freshman in
Costa's class, says "1984" is
here, but it isn / t &s bad as Orwell
predicted.
"The government in the U.S.
has gotten extremely large, just
as in the book," Grose says. We
even have some doublethink in
today's political candidates.
They often just say what they
think the people want to hear,
even if they don't believe it. Or
they don't even think about
what they are really saying."
People also are conforming to
the ideas of society, he says, but
it isn't Big Brother who is forcing
this conformation. People want
to be part of the group, he says.
Big Brother does exist in the
Soviet Union, Grose says, be
cause people have become
almost exactly like the society
depicted in "1984."
"The book does apply to to
day's society," he says. "The
signs are here and we're going to
have to work on preventing
'1984' from happening in the
U.S., but the book leaves no
hope. It's too pessimistic. I'm a
little more optimistic about our
future."
Kepler Johnson, another stu
dent in the class, agrees that the
communist countries are be
coming similar to the society
portrayed in the book.
"America seems to have
taken heed from the book," he
says. "China is still in revolt, so
we don't know which way
they're heading, but the other
communist block countries are
living '1984' now. Russia has Big
Brother; it even has the KGB as
the Thought Police."
People in the communist
countries aren't allowed to think
for themselves, Johnson says,
and they live in fear of the gov
ernment.
Doug Kennedy, also a class
member, says he believes the
United States and Soviet Union
are too close to "1984" already.
"Russia is probably closer to
becoming Big Brother than we
are," Kennedy says. "Russia is
treating the people like Big
Brother."
photo by Bonnie Langford
"Bugging" equipment
Charles L. Taylor, president of Data Loss
Prevention Inc., displays equipment used in
an electronic eavesdropping course. The
course is offered by the Texas A&M Law
Enforcement and Security Training Center.
(See related story, page 9.)