WARNING. WARNING. PSYCHOBABBLE LASERS. Ok, well, maybe not the lasers.
And hey, I like winter melon.
So, after reading "Animal Farm" and feeling a little lazy, I'm going to use it as my supplementary text.
Of course, I was going to say something, but then forgot it. Moving on.
In the appendices at the back, Orwell talks about voluntary censorship by the community because of the prevailing orthodoxy, and I think I might as well talk about that as well.
I don't hate people who go against what I say; not even a mild dislike. But I draw the line when people go against a viewpoint, and then have little to no evidence to back them up.
But then, the censorship puts a line through that. Similar to in "The Crucible", if you write something that borders on scandalous, in terms of the what the intellect of the society see as "correct", then you risk several attacks on your reputation, and you as a writer, only because what you write is not what's current, and what people like to hear.
And here's the psychobabble bit. I remember a while back that Kram told me, "Flattery works, even when it doesn't make sense. You could say that they have beautiful blue eyes, and even if they don't, it'll still work." Of course, that's tremendously paraphrased and rewritten because I don't have the memory to sustain such quotation over such a long period of time, but the point stands. Flattery, or in this case, Literary figurative flattery, (writing what the public wants to hear, rather than what's true, right, etc.) is applauded, even when the content is absolute rubbish, while the opposite is mostly condemned, subtly or otherwise, even if it's perfectly written, well written, and the like.
Of course, Orwell wrote that preface in 1944 or somewhere thereabouts, so the more astute would mention that it might not have any relevance today. What with magazines everywhere highlighting true/false scandals of people's lives. Although, that probably falls on the border of what the public wants, and what people don't want. In any case, people today are fairly free to criticise whatever they wish and whenever. Taboos exist, sure, but they're not as set in stone (at least to people like me) as they were half a century ago.
Then you look at Assange. He's talking/writing/posting quite freely about "secret" documents and whatever, which could be true, could be false, I don't really care. I haven't seen the site, same same. What does matter is the politician's reactions. For all I care, they could be fake, but the politicians are affirming they are real by condemning the release of these documents. That is; they're not saying "That man is a liar and thief", for instance.
Sometimes the reaction tells you far more than the verbal/expected response ever could. Because people react in different ways. Let me clarify. If you ever need to ask someone a question, asking "What's the color of *that* person's hair?" and pointing is, quite expectantly going to have either a "Huh" or a "[Color], why?". But, if you pay attention to whether they turn to you, away from you, stay still, move their head, or not, tone of voice, etc, you'll find that those traits are individual for that time, and person. To get an accurate picture of the person, then you need to repeatedly note small things. Because it's non-invasive and non-intrusive, it tends to be a better way than asking flat out, "Don't you have something better to do than to sit there twiddling your thumbs?"
Or something similar.
Also, he points out the rather prevalent thought pattern that it's quite "normal" to criticise yourself and your country incredibly harshly, but it's not OK to do the same for other more "external" objects/places/things. Medical centre, there's a poster saying "If you had a friend who talked to you the way you talk to yourself, would they be your friend for long?". Which leads onto the "I'm so bad, so kill me" etc. Without being too preachy (peachy) there's a rather fine line between what's acceptable joking, and what's serious stuff. (Serious business.)
And lastly, following on from that, is how our society now has lost all subtlety. Or, most of it. These days, you can quite openly insult someone, and then, just say "Just kidding", and still have a more or less good relation with that person. Similarly, the meaning and impact of swearing has been degraded with the use of it. It's exactly how "The Scream" has been degraded because of how popular and universal it is. So much so, that you could at one point get inflatable balloon men of the solitary figure, and/or keychains. Somewhat unspeakable, but it's a successful painting because it has broken the barrier/breached the border (alliteration) of what's considered High and Low culture, or rather, the Fine Arts and the Popular Arts.
This is probably going to go online and in BB in a more refined form, because people obv want to read this.
Neku.
You thought you were safe, didn't you? Shame on you.
Hoping someone cares. Or maybe, that no-one cares. Wallow in obscurity.
