"“How Could You Tell How Much of It Was Lies?” The Controversy of Truth in George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four "
By: Siobhan Chapman
Summarized by: Skylar Murphy
Siobhan Chapman takes a philosophical approach to George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four in her literary criticism titled, “’How Could You Tell How Much of It Was Lies?’ The Controversy of Truth in George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four.” Her inclusion of criticisms accompanied with her own arguments do well to inform her readers of the intricacies found within Orwell’s text, while still clearly conveying an array of points found in Nineteen Eighty-Four.
Chapman employs many different views of various literary critics to establish a constant understanding for her readers that indeed there is much controversy over the interpretations found within George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four. Chapman’s focus is centered on the novel’s distinctions between truth and what is untrue. Her emphasis lies in how Orwell’s characters interpret each form of evidence presented to them by their controlling political power, and the actions that develop from their dichotomizations of this data into the categories of true and false. (Chapman, 'How could you tell how much of it was lies?' The controversy of truth in George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four 72) Chapman takes this as a simplistic view, and thus expands to inform her readers of a further differentiation that occurs, one dependent on the actions following affirmation of truth.
Chapman spends a good deal of her criticism developing her argument that’s based upon the previously mentioned differentiation of reactions to truth. It was in her analysis that the distinguishing factor between the two was in a sense of differing altitudes, truth-committed and non truth-committed. Between herself and her colleague she was able to define a definitive diction of each as: “’a discourse characterized by a lack of commitment either to the truth or to the falsity of the propositions it contains’” (Chapman and Routledge 1) (Chapman, 'How could you tell how much of it was lies?' The controversy of truth in George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four 74) It is with this distinguishable difference that a great portion of her criticism is dedicated to, for the benefit of her reader’s most clear view of this interesting interpretation that motivates the remainder of the document.
As the article continues Chapman takes time to discuss the past meanings of truth throughout history. This part of her analysis sheds light on the assumptive native that truth has held as a system of webs that construct common knowledge. (Chapman, 'How could you tell how much of it was lies?' The controversy of truth in George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four 81) It is here that she entertains the aspects within Nineteen Eighty-Four that use “doublethink,” and how the controlling political power exploits their citizens’ ignorance by holding two truths, and making sure those citizens only know of one truth at any given time. (Chapman, 'How could you tell how much of it was lies?' The controversy of truth in George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four 75)
Throughout this text, Chapman introduces new and key ideas that allow the reader new and clearer insights when reading George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four. Chapman makes certain her reader is introduced to criticism of her intellectual peer in a way that allows the reader to see multiple views on the controversy of truth within Nineteen Eighty-Four. Chapman uses her insightful criticisms and analyses to further challenge future readers of the novel Nineteen Eighty-Four with lessons that can be further applied in all future readings, and, even in some effects, in her reader’s daily interactions.
References:
Chapman, Siobhan and Christopher Routledge. "Reading "Great Books": Non Truth-Committed Discourse and Silly Novel Readers." Forum for Modern Language Studies 39 (2003): 1-14. Document.
Chapman, Siobhan. "'How could you tell how much of it was lies?' The controversy of truth in George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four." Journal of Literary Semantics 38.1 (2009): 71-86. Literary Criticism.
Siobhan Chapman takes a philosophical approach to George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four in her literary criticism titled, “’How Could You Tell How Much of It Was Lies?’ The Controversy of Truth in George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four.” Her inclusion of criticisms accompanied with her own arguments do well to inform her readers of the intricacies found within Orwell’s text, while still clearly conveying an array of points found in Nineteen Eighty-Four.
Chapman employs many different views of various literary critics to establish a constant understanding for her readers that indeed there is much controversy over the interpretations found within George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four. Chapman’s focus is centered on the novel’s distinctions between truth and what is untrue. Her emphasis lies in how Orwell’s characters interpret each form of evidence presented to them by their controlling political power, and the actions that develop from their dichotomizations of this data into the categories of true and false. (Chapman, 'How could you tell how much of it was lies?' The controversy of truth in George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four 72) Chapman takes this as a simplistic view, and thus expands to inform her readers of a further differentiation that occurs, one dependent on the actions following affirmation of truth.
Chapman spends a good deal of her criticism developing her argument that’s based upon the previously mentioned differentiation of reactions to truth. It was in her analysis that the distinguishing factor between the two was in a sense of differing altitudes, truth-committed and non truth-committed. Between herself and her colleague she was able to define a definitive diction of each as: “’a discourse characterized by a lack of commitment either to the truth or to the falsity of the propositions it contains’” (Chapman and Routledge 1) (Chapman, 'How could you tell how much of it was lies?' The controversy of truth in George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four 74) It is with this distinguishable difference that a great portion of her criticism is dedicated to, for the benefit of her reader’s most clear view of this interesting interpretation that motivates the remainder of the document.
As the article continues Chapman takes time to discuss the past meanings of truth throughout history. This part of her analysis sheds light on the assumptive native that truth has held as a system of webs that construct common knowledge. (Chapman, 'How could you tell how much of it was lies?' The controversy of truth in George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four 81) It is here that she entertains the aspects within Nineteen Eighty-Four that use “doublethink,” and how the controlling political power exploits their citizens’ ignorance by holding two truths, and making sure those citizens only know of one truth at any given time. (Chapman, 'How could you tell how much of it was lies?' The controversy of truth in George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four 75)
Throughout this text, Chapman introduces new and key ideas that allow the reader new and clearer insights when reading George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four. Chapman makes certain her reader is introduced to criticism of her intellectual peer in a way that allows the reader to see multiple views on the controversy of truth within Nineteen Eighty-Four. Chapman uses her insightful criticisms and analyses to further challenge future readers of the novel Nineteen Eighty-Four with lessons that can be further applied in all future readings, and, even in some effects, in her reader’s daily interactions.
References:
Chapman, Siobhan and Christopher Routledge. "Reading "Great Books": Non Truth-Committed Discourse and Silly Novel Readers." Forum for Modern Language Studies 39 (2003): 1-14. Document.
Chapman, Siobhan. "'How could you tell how much of it was lies?' The controversy of truth in George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four." Journal of Literary Semantics 38.1 (2009): 71-86. Literary Criticism.