From WEB-CT
Author: Elizabeth Christiansen
Date: Thursday, September 11, 2008 9:17am
I've been particularly interested in the use/power of language in 1984--particularly
Orwell's use of seemingly contradictory language in the slogans presented by Big Brother
("Freedom is Slavery," et al); the messages these, well, messages perpetuate seem to
rule each other out.
In the simplest terms, though, they make a lot of sense; denying any sort of metaphor in
them (difficult, yes, but work with me), the word presented ("Freedom"), through the
word "is," becomes its opposite ("Slavery")--that is, the term itself takes on a new
meaning, in direct opposition to what the reader understands it to mean (we are,
remember, denying metaphor and looking only at the literal), and, thusly, the binary
presented by the word[s] (Freedom/Slavery) disappears: the two words now mean one
and the same.
Wittgenstein, in I forget which writing (sorry) suggests that, in order for a concept to
exist, it must have some sort of word that means it (italics on the "mean," I wish Icould
format this)--there can be no freedom is the word freedom does not exist, because,
without the word to define it, the concept itself can mean nothing; by changing the very
concept of the word "freedom," (here, to mean "slavery"--to the residents of Oceania,
Freedom IS Slavery) freedom itself cannot exist--indeed, it has taken, through language
rules/tactics as theororized by Wittgenstein, a contradictory meaning that, eventually,
will be the only meaning--Freedom, through the power of language, will itself eventually
come to be Slavery.
Just an observation.
