• CXORA@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    edit-2
    13 hours ago

    Idk, I likes that part. Ultimately Winston is flawed and weak and yet he thinks he’s making a grand defiant gesture, only to find out the party knew it all. All his secrets and triumphs where plainly and obviously known.

    Effectively he builds himself up as a dramatic hero in his mind, and in narrative. The reader gets swept along, but when he falls, when he is crushed, we remember all the gross parts of his personality. We see him as the broken, pathetic man he becomes at the end lf the novel. I enjoyed how the experience of reading the text, and the experience of remembering the text tell two very different stories.

    • Gathorall@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      10 hours ago

      But you see how if they immediately saw the base pathetic person Winston is beyond the curtain of his own narrative, none of that really works.

      • CXORA@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        10 hours ago

        Then he’s just an audience proxy, reflecting our own patheticness. :)

        I’m not saying everyone has to like 1984, I’m not saying there is one concrete experience of it. I’m merely pointing out that unlikable protaganists are a choice, and there can be a strong narrative experience when that choice is made.

        • Grail@multiverse.soulism.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 hours ago

          I’ll definitely recommend Gurgeh from The Player of Games as a great unlikeable protagonist. It helps that his friends call him on his bullshit, and that he’s quickly put in a situation where he’s one of the best people around. It helps us believe that the Culture’s idea of a doofus is quite a bit better than most civilisations’ idea of a good person.