- #1
kyle_soule
- 240
- 1
In 1984 you are introduced to a man named Syme. This man works for the Research Department, which is re-writing (11 Edition) the Newspeak Dictionary.
Now, what I don't understand is this...why is he so enthusiastic about the idea of re-writing the dictionary so that in the future it has so few words. The purpose of this, as he knows and states (and he is portrayed as an intelligent man) is to limit and control every aspect of life. It will "narrow the range of thought" and as he says it will narrow the range of consciousness so far that you basically don't even think on your own.
The question is, why would someone of intelligence be so for limiting the range of consciousness/thought? I don't understand why they would want this.
Another question I have is, is it to have this:
"Every concept that can ever be needed, will be expressed by exactly one word, with its meaning rigidly defined and all its subsidiary meanings rubbed out and forgotten."
by limiting the amount of words, his example is the word good and the word bad, instead of having bad as a word they just use ungood. For different levels of good they use plusgood and doubleplusgood, does this really describe the levels of good BETTER than excellent, perfect, etc?
Now, what I don't understand is this...why is he so enthusiastic about the idea of re-writing the dictionary so that in the future it has so few words. The purpose of this, as he knows and states (and he is portrayed as an intelligent man) is to limit and control every aspect of life. It will "narrow the range of thought" and as he says it will narrow the range of consciousness so far that you basically don't even think on your own.
The question is, why would someone of intelligence be so for limiting the range of consciousness/thought? I don't understand why they would want this.
Another question I have is, is it to have this:
"Every concept that can ever be needed, will be expressed by exactly one word, with its meaning rigidly defined and all its subsidiary meanings rubbed out and forgotten."
by limiting the amount of words, his example is the word good and the word bad, instead of having bad as a word they just use ungood. For different levels of good they use plusgood and doubleplusgood, does this really describe the levels of good BETTER than excellent, perfect, etc?