Comparison of how Orwell in 1984 and Ishiguro in Never Let Me Go use failure and futility in human relationships as a theme in their dystopian novels
Comparison of how Orwell in 1984 and Ishiguro in Never Let Me Go use failure and futility in human relationships as a theme in their dystopian novels
As humans, we judge ourselves by how others perceive us and seek to conform to a universally accepted code of ethics and laws. It is this inherent value that we possess, a conscience that make us different from animals and it is also what is missing to a large extent in Orwell’s “1984” and Ishiguro’s “Never Let Me Go”. The futility of relationships in these works is part of what makes the worlds in which they are based seem so bereft of hope and consequently, dystopia in nature.
In Orwell’s vision of humanity’s future, the only truly acceptable thing to ‘love’ is Big Brother. The Party restricts all other love so as to break down the ties between family, friends and lovers whilst transferring this loyalty to the Party itself as a form of control. The Party is said to have, “cut the links between child and parent, and between man and man, and between man and women.” This does not just show the breakdown of relationships, but the reduction of the self. The Party is removing the essential links that allow humanity to be more than a collective of individuals and instead uses this to its own ends, although what these are, beyond a desire for control, we never truly discover. It is partly this lack of knowledge of the Party’s overall goals that makes the situation seem so desperate, it is as though love is being removed without explanation or justification, making the whole process seem devoid of hope as there is no specific element against which to rebel.
A similar lack of knowledge also plagues the children of Hailsham in “Never Let Me Go”. Their future is not clearly explained; instead it is an undercurrent to their education that leaves them prepared for, but not truly conscious of, their fate. As Miss Lucy says, the students have been, “told and not told.” The situation is much the same for the reader, we learn
As humans, we judge ourselves by how others perceive us and seek to conform to a universally accepted code of ethics and laws. It is this inherent value that we possess, a conscience that make us different from animals and it is also what is missing to a large extent in Orwell’s “1984” and Ishiguro’s “Never Let Me Go”. The futility of relationships in these works is part of what makes the worlds in which they are based seem so bereft of hope and consequently, dystopia in nature.
In Orwell’s vision of humanity’s future, the only truly acceptable thing to ‘love’ is Big Brother. The Party restricts all other love so as to break down the ties between family, friends and lovers whilst transferring this loyalty to the Party itself as a form of control. The Party is said to have, “cut the links between child and parent, and between man and man, and between man and women.” This does not just show the breakdown of relationships, but the reduction of the self. The Party is removing the essential links that allow humanity to be more than a collective of individuals and instead uses this to its own ends, although what these are, beyond a desire for control, we never truly discover. It is partly this lack of knowledge of the Party’s overall goals that makes the situation seem so desperate, it is as though love is being removed without explanation or justification, making the whole process seem devoid of hope as there is no specific element against which to rebel.
A similar lack of knowledge also plagues the children of Hailsham in “Never Let Me Go”. Their future is not clearly explained; instead it is an undercurrent to their education that leaves them prepared for, but not truly conscious of, their fate. As Miss Lucy says, the students have been, “told and not told.” The situation is much the same for the reader, we learn