" 'You will understand that I must start by asking you certain questions.  In general terms, what are you prepared to do?'

‘Anything we are capable of,’ said Winston.

O’Brian had turned himself a little from his chair so that he was facing Winston.  He almost ignored Julia, seeming to take for granted that Winston was speaking for her.  For a moment the lids flitted down over his eyes.  He began asking questions in a low, expressionless voice, as though this were a routine, a sort of catechism, most of whose answers were known to him already.

‘You are prepared to give your lives?’

‘Yes.’

You are prepared to commit murder?’

‘Yes.’

‘To commit acts of sabotage that may cause the death of hundreds of innocent people?’

‘Yes.’

‘To betray your country to foreign powers?’

‘Yes.’

‘You are prepared to cheat, to forge, to blackmail, to corrupt the minds of children, to distribute habit-forming drugs to encourage prostitution, to disseminate venereal diseases—to do anything that is likely to cause demoralization and weaken the power of the Party.’

‘Yes.’

‘If somehow, it would somehow serve our interests, to throw sulphuric acid in a child’s face—are you prepared to do that?’

‘Yes.’

‘You are prepared to lose your identity and live out the rest of you life as a waiter or dock worker?’

‘Yes.’ “

Pg.172 1984

            I found this scene extremely interesting in some aspects.  Well clearly when many people see this scene they are shocked at Winston's willingness to do such things.  He ultimately declares his loyalty by doing the acts that he despises himself.  In the usual case it wouldn't make any sense, but again, we have to realize what Winston is thinking at this moment.  There is someone in this screwed up and very watched over society that supports them (even though he didn't really support Winston but we aren't supposed to know that yet).  The fact that someone shares this beliefs and would turn him in simple amazes Winston and he is willing to do anything as a result.  Although many people find this to be outrageous and totally stupid, the sad fact is that this kind of declaration happens all the time.  Whenever there is a common enemy, everyone will unite to destroy it.  Of course it always depends on the extremity of the situation.  In the political case though, the people will always face the highest stakes to get what they want.  That is the way of politics.  It changes the lives of the mass, so it becomes extremely important. 

        What I love about this scene though, is that Orwell displays this common trait in such a creative way.  Not many instances, does a person bluntly say that they are willing to kill hundreds of people or kill a child.  Most of the time people would hesitate.  But Winston is desperate for change, and a new beginning and Orwell shows that brilliantly, even through the actions of a plain character like Winston.   

"With those children, he thought, that wretched woman must lead a life of terror.  Another year, two years, and they would be watching her night and day for symptoms of unorthodoxy.  Nearly all children nowadays were horrible.  What was worst of all was that by such means of such organizations as the Spies they were systematically turned into ungovernable little savages, and yet this produced in them no tendency whatever to rebel against the discipline of the party.  On the conrary, they adored the Party and everything connected with it.  The songs, the processions, the banners, the hiking, the drilling with dummy rifles, the yelling with slogans, the worship of Big Brother--it was all a glorious game to them.  All their ferocity was turned outwards, against the enemies of the States, against the foreigners, traitors, saboteurs, thought-criminals.  It was almost normal for people over thirty to be frightened of their own children.  And with good reason, for hardly  week past passed in which the Times did not carry a paragraph describing how some eavesdropping little sneak--"child hero" was the phrase generally used--had overheard some compromising remark and denounced his parents to the Thought Police."

In George Orwell's well-acclaimed novel 1984, the character Winston heavily reflects the nature of the nature of this dystopian society. In this passage Winston, a lonely middle-aged man, reflects on the nature of children in this society.  it is a huge contrast to what children are seen as in our eyes.  To all of us childhood is the age of innocence, the age of knowledge.  These years of our lives reflect heavily on the kind of person we will end up for the rest of our lives.  The government ruled by the notorious Big Brother seems to have recognized this and developed a way to integrate the government's message to them.  The government also seems to isolate the children from their parents, which is a hard thing to do in general.  When we are born, we depend heavily on our mothers, they are our world, our center.  Our mothers in return cannot help but love us.

What I found so curious about this passage was the complete change in direction to the common feeling of childhood.  The government has integrated itself so far into the lives of its citizens that it has even destroyed the natural bonds that human beings naturally make.  There is no loyalty.  Children can no longer depend on their parents because they are instructed to be looking after them.  The parents, even though they still love their children, cannot help but feel a complete mistrust with their children which takes away any chance of forming a close relationship.  The view of children has turned completely black, enough for even the narrator to use dirty words, like 'little sneak'.  It is very interesting how Orwell decided to use children as the object of fear; by constructing a world that hates  them the government is making their own loyal subjects from scratch.

My Handicap

3. What would my Handicap be?

As I read through Harrison Bergeron by Kurt Vonnegut Jr. many thoughts run through my head.  How disgusting the society is.  How hypocritical the government is.  How pitiful the characters are.  The story takes place in a futuristic society where equality has been declared in the future United States, where everyone wears handicaps to express this equality.  The main characters themselves suffer from such restrictions, such as to their intelligence or strength, because they have been deemed 'unfair'.  But of course I wondered what type of handicap I would have.  To know that I would have to know myself pretty well.  If I was overconfident of myself I would easily say that the amount of Handicaps I would have would be as extensive as Harrison Bergeron, the heavily handicapped rebel of the story.  But if I thought of myself as a lowly and stupid individual, I would say that I wouldn't have any handicaps.  But this all goes back to one question:  What truly makes a person talented or unique?  Every human being has something special about them and it doesn't necessarily have to be something to compete with.  But that is the whole point of the limitations of this dystopian society.  Those traits that you have that can be used to compete with are what they shunn, such as someone's ability to memorize quickly, or someone's attractive looks.  Everything that we take seriously in our society is taken away in this story.  No more chances for competitions like spelling bees, swim races, math contest, science bowl, or even the olympics.

If I were to follow that course of traits then I would have handicaps on my hands and brain mostly.  I believe that because I am mostly a silent person which  means I think a lot about life and many aspects that come across.  This has lead to my ability to analyze people and texts which may be used for enhancing my status, whether it be in grades or academic achievements.  The handicaps on my hands would mostly limit my love for drawing and painting.  Such arts are limited like the ballerinas in the story.

2.  Are there any benefits to propaganda? When and Why?

To many people propaganda is presented as a evil thing, a disturbing piece of our society.  People from all over the world with different political systems and cultures, have experienced its presence.  The United States used it to encourage men to join the army during both world wars; the Syrian government did it to expose their rivals as disgusting beings; the revolutionaries of the French Revolution used it to deface the monarchy.  Of course there is more to propaganda than presenting selfish needs.  Propaganda is used everywhere and for everything.  From the depths of Dr. Seuss's well-known story books, to the horrifying filth presented in Upton Sinclair's book The Jungle, propaganda is always able to send a strong message.

Though i gave very negative aspects of propaganda, let me remind you friends that it has presented itself since the earliest days of your lives.  Don't you remember that day when your mother came to your room to read you a bed time story.  She would tell the tales of many: a little red hooded girl who talked to strangers, a boy who to often cried wolf, or a young woman left at the mercy of step-mother.  Remember those stories?  What did they teach us?  Not to talk to strangers, not to lie. . . .   These tales basically told us what and what not to do.  We became scared at the prospect of meeting a stranger. The thought of lying made us feel guilty.   Being mean to others, like the evil step-sisters, was like committing a sin.  These stories told us what to do and what is best.  Of course these messages are directly what your parents want you to believe, so they present a heavy amount of this 'childish' propaganda, to influence us to the extent in which they cannot reach: our imagination.  For me whenever I did something remotely like the 'bad guys' from the stories, the thought of the monster creeping up to punish me was terrifying (took me months to get it out of my system).  

Obviously there is more to the benefits of propaganda than through the pure messages to children.  These days they are everywhere, but most of them are used in a way of a warning. If you do this 'bad' deed, then you are in for deep consequences.  Most of the time, in these cases, the consequences are not exaggerated, but there are those moments.  For instance,  these days I always see the no texting when driving ads on TV.  The viewer is presented with either a victim of a damaging crash or the family member of a fatal one, emphasizing how a small text dramatically destroyed them.  This is beneficial because it tells the youth in this nation to be careful and not to text when driving because they will be extremely hurt.  

When propaganda is used to send a positive moral message to the public I believe it used in a both beneficial and righteous way.