Reading Discussion: The Ministry of Truth

The Off-Topic forum for anything non-LDS related, such as sports or politics. Rated PG through PG-13.
honorentheos
God
Posts: 3762
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2020 2:15 am

Reading Discussion: The Ministry of Truth

Post by honorentheos »

This is the official thread for discussing the reading selection which is The Ministry of Truth: The Biography of George Orwell's 1984, by Dorian Lynskey.

Keeping spoilers out of the discussion is less of a concern with a nonfiction book of this kind but I do want to keep a schedule that encourages people to read and participate who may have constraints on the time they have to read while keeping the discussion moving so others don't lose interest and move on.

EDIT: Schedule shifted one week.
I propose the following discussion schedule. Read at whatever pace works best for you but please constrain the discussion to the following:

May 28 - June 11: Read through Chapter 4. (Approximately 85 pages) During the week while reading please feel free to share anything related to why you are participating, if you've read 1984 itself and what circumstances caused you to read it. Or other similar pre-reading topics.

June 12 - June 18: Read though Chapters 9/ end of Part 1. (Approximately 100 pages) Discuss up though Chapter 4.

June 19 - June 25: Read though end of book. (Approximately 80 Pages) Discuss through end of Part 1.

June 26 - : Catch up on reading, full discussion on the book and on Orwell encouraged.

Nominations for the next reading will open in a separate thread the week June 19 with voting occuring on the selection at the end of that week so we can transition to the next book after the week of the 26th.

Happy reading!
Last edited by honorentheos on Tue Jun 07, 2022 2:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
honorentheos
God
Posts: 3762
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2020 2:15 am

Re: Reading Discussion: The Ministry of Truth

Post by honorentheos »

I have a question for those reading: Would you prefer to have this thread be the only thread and discussion constrained to the schedule? Or that a second "spoiler" thread be started where all discussion is allowed? So those who finish quickly can share their thoughts while fresh and engage in discussion as they prefer? While those reading on pace keep to this thread until they finish and join the other thread? My sense is this group may warrant an experiment with this format.

Thoughts?
User avatar
Morley
God
Posts: 1560
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 6:17 pm
Location: detail from Alice Neel's 1980 self portrait

Re: Reading Discussion: The Ministry of Truth

Post by Morley »

I have limited ability to post right now, but need to write this. I had my doubts about this choice and grumbled to myself when I bought it, last week.

That said, it has turned out to be an excellent read. If the rest of this book is as good as the first few chapters, I’m going to thoroughly enjoy it.

I love it when I take a class or read a book that turns out to be a pleasant surprise. Thanks to those of you who promoted and voted for this.
honorentheos
God
Posts: 3762
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2020 2:15 am

Re: Reading Discussion: The Ministry of Truth

Post by honorentheos »

On page 74, Lynskey notes that many people encounter Nineteen Eighty-Four as a companion to Aldous Huxley's A Brave New World. That's how I came to read it, as the second book following A Brave New World in my high school AP English class. And, to my shame, it is the only time I've read it. The call to revisit it in adulthood is one I now plan to remedy along with reading Chrome Yellow.

This, our reading selection, is one of those books that would benefit from a short form of discussion, where comments and points are raised, responses shared, and the ball of conversation kept bouncing. So many topics from utopias and revolution, socialism v. fascism v. totalitarianism, how one responds in an age of chaos when the threats that loom are not yet fully in view nor even apprehended as being what they were...there's a lot to unpack. The man whose editor described as, "...at one and the same time an extreme intellectual and a violent anti-intellectual. Similarly he is a frightful snob - still (he must forgive me for saying this), and a genuine hater of every form of snobbery." An idealist with no faith in idealism? Or no ideas as to what ideals could be found to be worthy? That's the sense of him I pick up, anyway, though the author has Henry Miller offer the opinion he was a "foolish idealist" recalling their meeting when Orwell was on his way to fight in the Spanish Civil War. It makes his choice to change his name from Eric Blair in part to distance himself from his upbringing while buffering his family from the consequences of failure if he did not succeed as a writer suitably conflicted and gives yet another layer of meaning to the name he chose.

So, let me open the discussion with a thought and question on truth since it is in the title of this biography/literary examination.

The following is from a thread on this board from not long after the election of Donald J. Trump in 2016. And it came to mind while reading as perhaps capturing what makes our times feel like Nineteen Eighty-Four may be a relic sent back to us from a not-so-distant future (also news to me that it is only 1984 in the US):
_honorentheos wrote:
Fri Dec 23, 2016 2:06 pm
beastie wrote: But my concern is this: this is the type of dialogue that liberals lap up with a spoon. I think it's the type of "elitist" dialogue that many US conservatives dismiss. So I don't see much progress being possible.

I think we're at the point where we have to be practical about saving our democracy. That's why I agree with doc when he concludes that the left has to learn some lessons about communication in this era. The right has been a bit more savvy about that all along, oddly enough. They were the first to recognize the power of language in terms of labels, for example. Call it a death tax instead of an estate tax, for example. Liberals have to wise up.
Clegg, in the second video, makes the same point to Haidt. He comments on the approach many liberals take of trying to make cases through hard logic and accounting. And he suggests that conservatives are decades ahead in using spin to sell their ideas. He also wants to see a more emotion-based approach to selling liberal ideas.

While I think there's value in this, I have deep concerns as well. When Sarah Palin described death panels as being part of the ACA, she didn't just appeal to people's emotions. She lied. When Donald Trump proclaimed he was going to build a wall between the US and Mexico and make Mexico pay for it, he didn't just appeal to people's emotions. He lied.

We are told repeatedly that one of the differences that mattered in this election was that some people took Trump literally, while others took him seriously but not literally. That's just code for his being able to say whatever might trigger a person's emotional reaction but not being accountable to that potential voter to provide real information as to how he'd govern, what he'd actually accomplish, or even how seriously he could be taken. I'd also say this was a concern I had in 2008 with Obama where the promise of hope essentially created space for people to insert almost anything they wanted into the idea.

That's bad for democracy. So, yeah, I guess there is an argument to be made that the liberal political agenda should take a page from the conservative playbook if they want to win in this post truth world. But that's a different argument than what it takes to defend democracy.
So it is interesting to me that after living through the much more dystopian reality that was Republican Spain in the war, the author says it had this effect on Orwell:
"For Orwell, the truth mattered even, or perhaps especially, when it was inconvenient. In his earliest non-fiction, he had finessed anecdotes and omitted awkward facts for literary purposes, but Homage to Catalonia was written with a new commitment to accuracy as a moral virtue. Without a consensus reality, he argued, "there can be no argument; the necessary minimum of agreement cannot be reached."

Yet, "The peculiar horror of the present moment is that we cannot be sure that this is so (that common sense will win out). It is quite possible we are descending into an age when two plus two will make five because the Leader says so...One has only to think of the sinister possibilities of the radio, State-controlled education and so forth, and realize that, 'the truth is great and will prevail' is a prayer rather than an axiom."
"
Last edited by honorentheos on Mon Jun 06, 2022 4:26 am, edited 2 times in total.
honorentheos
God
Posts: 3762
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2020 2:15 am

Re: Reading Discussion: The Ministry of Truth

Post by honorentheos »

Morley wrote:
Mon Jun 06, 2022 3:30 am
I have limited ability to post right now, but need to write this. I had my doubts about this choice and grumbled to myself when I bought it, last week.

That said, it has turned out to be an excellent read. If the rest of this book is as good as the first few chapters, I’m going to thoroughly enjoy it.

I love it when I take a class or read a book that turns out to be a pleasant surprise. Thanks to those of you who promoted and voted for this.
I'm glad it is rewarding your time and look forward to your thoughts, Morley. It's both an enjoyable read yet simultaneously a book packed with ideas. And with the added effect many good non-fiction books have of adding to my reading list tenfold as I work on finishing it.
honorentheos
God
Posts: 3762
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2020 2:15 am

Re: Reading Discussion: The Ministry of Truth

Post by honorentheos »

honorentheos wrote:
Mon Jun 06, 2022 4:22 am
On page 74, Lynskey notes that many people encounter Nineteen Eighty-Four as a companion to Aldous Huxley's A Brave New World. That's how I came to read it, as the second book following A Brave New World in my high school AP English class. And, to my shame, it is the only time I've read it. The call to revisit it in adulthood is one I now plan to remedy along with reading Chrome Yellow.

This, our reading selection, is one of those books that would benefit from a short form of discussion, where comments and points are raised, responses shared, and the ball of conversation kept bouncing. So many topics from utopias and revolution, socialism v. fascism v. totalitarianism, how one responds in an age of chaos when the threats that loom are not yet fully in view nor even apprehended as being what they were...there's a lot to unpack. The man whose editor described as, "...at one and the same time an extreme intellectual and a violent anti-intellectual. Similarly he is a frightful snob - still (he must forgive me for saying this), and a genuine hater of every form of snobbery." An idealist with no faith in idealism? Or no ideas as to what ideals could be found to be worthy? That's the sense of him I pick up, anyway, though the author has Henry Miller offer the opinion he was a "foolish idealist" recalling their meeting when Orwell was on his way to fight in the Spanish Civil War. It makes his choice to change his name from Eric Blair in part to distance himself from his upbringing while buffering his family from the consequences of failure if he did not succeed as a writer suitably conflicted and gives yet another layer of meaning to the name he chose.

So, let me open the discussion with a thought and question on truth since it is in the title of this biography/literary examination.

The following is from a thread on this board from not long after the election of Donald J. Trump in 2016. And it came to mind while reading as perhaps capturing what makes our times feel like Nineteen Eighty-Four may be a relic sent back to us from a not-so-distant future (also news to me that it is only 1984 in the US):
_honorentheos wrote:
Fri Dec 23, 2016 2:06 pm

Clegg, in the second video, makes the same point to Haidt. He comments on the approach many liberals take of trying to make cases through hard logic and accounting. And he suggests that conservatives are decades ahead in using spin to sell their ideas. He also wants to see a more emotion-based approach to selling liberal ideas.

While I think there's value in this, I have deep concerns as well. When Sarah Palin described death panels as being part of the ACA, she didn't just appeal to people's emotions. She lied. When Donald Trump proclaimed he was going to build a wall between the US and Mexico and make Mexico pay for it, he didn't just appeal to people's emotions. He lied.

We are told repeatedly that one of the differences that mattered in this election was that some people took Trump literally, while others took him seriously but not literally. That's just code for his being able to say whatever might trigger a person's emotional reaction but not being accountable to that potential voter to provide real information as to how he'd govern, what he'd actually accomplish, or even how seriously he could be taken. I'd also say this was a concern I had in 2008 with Obama where the promise of hope essentially created space for people to insert almost anything they wanted into the idea.

That's bad for democracy. So, yeah, I guess there is an argument to be made that the liberal political agenda should take a page from the conservative playbook if they want to win in this post truth world. But that's a different argument than what it takes to defend democracy.
So it is interesting to me that after living through the much more dystopian reality that was Republican Spain in the war, the author says it had this effect on Orwell:
"For Orwell, the truth mattered even, or perhaps especially, when it was inconvenient. In his earliest non-fiction, he had finessed anecdotes and omitted awkward facts for literary purposes, but Homage to Catalonia was written with a new commitment to accuracy as a moral virtue. Without a consensus reality, he argued, "there can be no argument; the necessary minimum of agreement cannot be reached."

Yet, "The peculiar horror of the present moment is that we cannot be sure that this is so (that common sense will win out). It is quite possible we are descending into an age when two plus two will make five because the Leader says so...One has only to think of the sinister possibilities of the radio, State-controlled education and so forth, and realize that, 'the truth is great and will prevail' is a prayer rather than an axiom."
"
Thoughts on this idea? That truth matters, even in a world where propoganda is winning and emotional appeal is cheaper and more effective? If so, what to do? Or hell, if not, then what to do?

It's just so striking to me that this is what Orwell came back with after living through the infighting and lies that consumed Spain and nearly cost him his life.
honorentheos
God
Posts: 3762
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2020 2:15 am

Re: Reading Discussion: The Ministry of Truth

Post by honorentheos »

Hey all -

Would everyone who is interested mind checking in? Please post if you are interested in the book but haven't started reading, are reading and roughly which chapter you are on, read it the day before it was confirmed and have read five books since then so it's a hazy memory now, or anything else I'm not thinking of that may help gauge if the schedule is appropriate or needs adjusted.

I started with chapter 5 this morning. I had to do a little catch-up reading over the weekend due to being busy at work last week and getting behind my original plan. Once I set other things aside and get into it, I want to keep reading and wish other life needs didn't get in the way of book consumption.
Marcus
God
Posts: 5037
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2021 10:44 pm

Re: Reading Discussion: The Ministry of Truth

Post by Marcus »

honorentheos wrote:
Mon Jun 06, 2022 5:04 pm
Hey all -

Would everyone who is interested mind checking in? Please post if you are interested in the book but haven't started reading, are reading and roughly which chapter you are on, read it the day before it was confirmed and have read five books since then so it's a hazy memory now, or anything else I'm not thinking of that may help gauge if the schedule is appropriate or needs adjusted.

I started with chapter 5 this morning. I had to do a little catch-up reading over the weekend due to being busy at work last week and getting behind my original plan. Once I set other things aside and get into it, I want to keep reading and wish other life needs didn't get in the way of book consumption.
I am enjoying reading your comments and although I am very interested in this, just for me, even though I voted on the book choice, I simply cannot make any commitments right now.
honorentheos wrote:
Sat May 28, 2022 7:48 pm

Nominations for the next reading will open in a separate thread the week June 12 with voting occuring on the selection at the end of that week so we can transition to the next book after the week of the 19th.

Happy reading!

The nuptials of my child are the weekend of the 18th. I will try to be involved in the next voting, but after the 19th, I am REALLY looking forward to being involved! A palate cleanser, as it were. :D :D :D :D

Maybe this is just a rough season for others as well.
User avatar
Res Ipsa
God
Posts: 9569
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2020 6:44 pm
Location: Playing Rabbits

Re: Reading Discussion: The Ministry of Truth

Post by Res Ipsa »

honorentheos wrote:
Mon Jun 06, 2022 5:04 pm
Hey all -

Would everyone who is interested mind checking in? Please post if you are interested in the book but haven't started reading, are reading and roughly which chapter you are on, read it the day before it was confirmed and have read five books since then so it's a hazy memory now, or anything else I'm not thinking of that may help gauge if the schedule is appropriate or needs adjusted.

I started with chapter 5 this morning. I had to do a little catch-up reading over the weekend due to being busy at work last week and getting behind my original plan. Once I set other things aside and get into it, I want to keep reading and wish other life needs didn't get in the way of book consumption.
I am, but just haven't had time to start. I should have some free evenings this week to dig in.
he/him
When I go to sea, don’t fear for me. Fear for the storm.

Jessica Best, Fear for the Storm. From The Strange Case of the Starship Iris.
User avatar
Jersey Girl
God
Posts: 6828
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2020 3:51 am
Location: In my head

Re: Reading Discussion: The Ministry of Truth

Post by Jersey Girl »

FYI: The poll shows a total of 5 people voted for this book. One of those was me. I don't have time to devote to it right now and that is typical of my summers. So...

1. honor
2. Morley
3. Marcus
4. Jersey
5. RI (Possibly)

Voted for the book. Just trying to help tighten things up.
We only get stronger when we are lifting something that is heavier than what we are used to. ~ KF

Slava Ukraini!
Post Reply