Blog #26: “1984 and Thin Gruel”

“Every year fewer and fewer words, and the range of consciousness always a little smaller.”

After reading both Part I of 1984 and the “Thin Gruel” articles, I must say that I do see a connection between the Newspeak of 1984 and the actual censorship that has and still is taking place in our literature and language. The main principle of Newspeak is that if all the words that describe controversial topics are removed, then so are the controversial topics themselves, since no one has the words to describe them anymore. With today’s world of censorship, controversial topics are removed, and in a sense, also disappear from the minds of the children. If certain controversial topics are dropped from textbooks, and the students don’t learn them, then perhaps they will never learn them.

The article, on page 6, defines censorship as “the deliberate removal of language, ideas, and books from the classroom or library because they are deemed offensive or controversial.” In fact, certain textbook publishers, such as Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, deliberately censored their own material in order to try to please angry parents before they had a chance to complain. In 1984, Big Brother eliminated certain words (most of them, actually) to eliminate the chance of a revolt, and in a sense, created stability. This was also what the textbook publishers were trying to achieve—stability. However, even after many, many rounds of censors and re-writes, people were still upset and unsatisfied. You can please some of the people some of the time, but not all of the people all of the time. The publishers learned this the hard way, and had many textbook sets fail because they appeared too feminist, sexist, racist, or contained vulgar or inappropriate material.

Both 1984 and “Thin Gruel” deal with censorship enacted to create stability and peace. While 1984’s was more successful (at the beginning), both have weaknesses that deal with the inability to please everyone, everytime.