Monday, May 19, 2014

Socratic Seminar #4 1984

Summary: 
Book 3 of 1984 shows Winston in the Ministry of Love being tortured by O'Brien. In book 3, more information is revealed about the party's motives and more is revealed about Winston.Winston in the end succumbs to what the party wanted him to be and he finally revealed that he loved Big Brother.

Level 2 Questions:
1. What is the effect of having 1984 broken into three distinct parts?
 - The fact that 1984 is broken into three parts represents Winston's treatment and understanding of the party. "'There are three stages in your reintegration,' said O'Brien. 'There is learning, there is understanding, and there is acceptance.'" In book 1 of 1984, Winston sought for more information about the proles and the past. In book 2, Winston broke the law with Julia and gained a new level of understanding about his feelings toward Big Brother. Lastly in book 3, Winston finally accepted that there could never be a revolt against Big Brother and he finally accepted that he would always love Big Brother. The three distinct parts of the book represent Winston learning more about the past and more about the proles, understanding his new goal in going against the party, and finally accepting that he loved Big Brother.
Appeal: Logical

2. How is Winston's relationship with O'Brien similar to his relationship with Big Brother?
- In chapter two of book 3, Winston described O'Brien as the, "tormentor, he was the protector, he was the inquisitor, he was the friend."Similarly, Big Brother was characterized as the protector. Big Brother protected the people from war and from capitalism and other horrors. He gave everything to the people of Oceania but he also hurt them. Big Brother took away the people's freedom which is exactly what O'Brien did to Winston. Winston looked up to both O'Brien and Big Brother; they both protected him. Winston also had his freedoms taken away by both O'Brien and Big Brother.
Appeal: Emotional
3. How did Winston's relationship with Julia change after being in the Ministry of Love?
- After being tortured in the ministry of love, Winston and Julia had lost their feelings for one another. Before they had been caught by the thought police Winston and Julia were in it together, but after betraying one another their priorities changed. Julia noted about betraying Winston, "You think there's no other way of saving yourself and you're quite ready to save yourself that way. You want it to happen to the other person." At the end, they realized that their love could not be saved and that the party had performed the ultimate test in room 101 and both Winston and Julia failed by betraying one another.
Appeal: Emotional
4. By the end of the book, is there a part of Winston that can resist manipulation?
-By the end of the book there is no part of Winston that can resist manipulation. In the end Winston, "had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Brother." Winston was tortured mentally and physically and there was no way that he could continue thinking revolutionary thoughts after being in the ministry of love. What determined whether Winston would be released from the ministry of love would be himself. When Winston finally accepted Big Brother and the party that meant that there was no more resisting manipulation.
Appeal: Logical
5. What is the party's strategy regarding Winston?
- The party's strategy towards Winston is to learn about his kind and destroy it. Winston was the only one in Oceania that was able to have memories and block the party's interests. "O'Brien smiled slightly. 'You are a flaw in the pattern, Winston. You are a stain that must be wiped out... When finally you surrender to us, it must be your own freewill." The party was interested in Winston and so they took their time observing him but their overall goal was to have him surrender to them and accept that he loved Big Brother.
Appeal: Logical
6. What is the party's purpose in creating Goldstein's book?
- The party's purpose in creating Goldstein's book was to create and enemy that they could protect the people from. The idea of the brotherhood and Goldstein allowed the people of Oceania to think that there was another option of governing that they could go to. This made it easy for the party to catch people like Winston who thought that there wan another alternative like the brotherhood. The party created Goldstein's book to outline obvious facts about ruling over others and to spark excitement in people like Winston. But in reality, the steps in Goldstein's book for a revolution could never actually happen. As O'Brien said, "It's all nonsense."
Appeal: Logical 

Level 3 Questions:



7. How has technology affected our society?
- Technology has made us more connected to one another, given us easy access to information, and has made our lives relatively easier, but we are now completely dependent on technology and have less privacy. Now, it’s not abnormal for people to own phones, iPods, ipads/tablets, computers, etc. In fact, it’s expected that everyone have a smart phone. We live in a world were if you don’t have a computer, it’s likely you’ll have a harder time in school because more than half of the assignments are posted online for you. The act of sending a letter is considered archaic by most, why not? An email, phone call, or a text is faster. Technology has helped us send and receive information faster, which has helped people socially, culturally, economically, and intellectually. But where are our searches and messages stored? There are privacy settings that supposedly protect us from getting our information leaked, but how many people do they actually protect us from? “As O’Brien passed the telescreen a thought seemed to strike him. He stopped, turned aside, and pressed a switch on the wall. There was a sharp snap. The voice had stopped.” (140) We are living in a world where the government can track our calls, emails, texts, instant messages, social media, etc. Privacy is just a façade if you are caught up with technology.
Appeal: Emotional

8. How much power should a government have over its people for it to be beneficial to society?
- A government should be able to provide protection and have some power over its people, but individuals should have rights and a voice in political agreements. Like in America, there is the bill of rights, the constitution, and the declaration of independence, which all protects the rights of individuals. Many people believe that the government should have little power over its people but I believe that results in chaos and revolts. Where would we be without our government? Sure, we would not have bad relations with other nations in the world but the government everyday helps us. Highways, hospitals, schools, national parks, social security, welfare, judicial system, election system, armies, FEMA, food stamps, food safety regulations, public health regulations, health care, coast guard, national weather service, etc, are all ways in which the government helps us. The government helps provide aid to, “the Middle, and the Low,” (152) so they should be granted some control over individuals. 
Appeal: Logical


9. What role does memory play in an accurate account of history?
Memory is a human trait that comes to us naturally. Some might say that we cannot pick and choose which memories to remember, but what about in the cases of brainwash and manipulation? Unpleasant memories can be suppressed and destroyed. If one chooses to suppress a memory and have a negative connotation with it then the account of history might not be as accurate. We look at different times in the past all based on how we feel and if it is considered good or bad. In the case of 1984, everyday people have to be a part of the 2 minutes of hate which is negatively directed towards Goldstein. The memories of those people are being changed and reshuffled into believing only in the bad sides of Goldstein due to the 2 minutes of hate. The accuracy or inaccuracy of the memories makes no difference to Big Brother. History and the past are determined partly by point of views and records that could have been altered by bias.
Appeal: Logical



Monday, May 5, 2014

Socratic Seminar Reflection #2 1984



             The Socratic seminars made me think more about the power that the proles had and Winston's attitude towards them. Before the seminar, I knew that the proles were the only ones who would be able to lead a successful revolt against Big Brother but I questioned if they actually wanted to. After the discussion I am more confident that Winston would be able to lead the proles into a revolution if he wanted to. Charlie said that if Winston were to confide in anyone about his revolutionary thoughts, he would confide in the antique shop keeper. Before the seminar I had thought about that a little but I didn't really analyze it. It makes sense that Winston would trust someone who appreciated the pre Big Brother world and who was not under constant supervision of a telescreen. 

             During the Socratic Seminar, a lot of people thought that the proles were oblivious to the party's discrimination towards them. I agreed with Molly when she thought that the proles did know that they were thought of as animals compared to the party. Like Molly, I believe that the proles are aware that they are discriminated against but they are content with their lives because that is all they know. I disagreed with Ryan when he said that Winston was not the type of person that would be able to rebel against Big Brother. I disagreed with him because Winston has been able to rebel. He started a diary against Big Brother which is highly illegal, he has been with prostitutes, wandered in the prole section of town, and has illegally thought of taking down Big Brother. In the time of 1984, what Winston was doing was completely and utterly against the law so I believe that he is the type of person to rebel. I wish I had said this during the discussion to make a point and to see if other people agreed with me. 

         During the seminars, everyone was able to contribute and really thoughtful questions were asked. Everyone was very passionate about our reading and I felt that everyone was very well prepared and interested. Also, I thought that most people emphasized rhetorical appeals more than last time. Lastly, I thought that the conversation never hit an awkward point and that the conversation was rich with thought.

              One thing that hurt the seminars was that I felt a lot of people were repeating similar thoughts and questions. Even if a question had been asked already or a passage had already been analyzed, ten minutes afterward a person would bring it back up again which seemed redundant. Also, even though everyone got to speak, there were three or four people who dominated the conversation and made it hard for other people to talk. Overall, the conversation went really well but the dominance and repetition needs to be worked on for the next seminar.