In George Orwell's 1984, Winston certainly lives in an oppressed society in Oceania. However, the dystopia itself is his. From the eyes of the ruling class, from the throne of "Big Brother", it sure wouldn't seem like such a terrible place then. There are always multiple angles to be seen in a dystopian film, and the view most often seen by the audience is that of the oppressed. It's interesting to think that a dystopia and a utopia can exist simultaneously in the same place, it just depends who's shoes you put on. As Horan points out, "Few would trade our world for the one described by Orwell, but part of the reason we feel this way is because the story is artfully presented so that we identify with Winston".
He also speaks of the common use of scientists as political figures in the genre of dystopian science fiction. However the label of scientist hardly narrows the spectrum of people fit for political power. Take doctors for example. Just because somebody is a doctor, says basically nothing more about them than the fact that they have a degree in medicine. They could use their training to save lives, or they could use their position to lie, cheat, and steal for their own benefit. Science, and the scientists who do it, are the same. Whether a scientist would use a political position for better or for worse lies in the content of a persons character, separate from their designation as somebody who studies science.
No comments:
Post a Comment