Random: What are you doing right now?

Hey hey hey! Guess what? It turns out my 3,000 word essay is redundant, thanks to its apparant complexity. Im really peeved because it took me a whole day to write and perfect, and i was really hoping it would be my last ever essay for English Literature. So, im now working on simplifying the entire coursework, which essentially means rewriting it, this time to match a minimum target of 2,000 words. Great. >.>

Since i cant submit the original one to the examinations board, i'll just post it here to make an example of what i spend my time doing in the subject:

A Comparison of the presentations of dystopias in "The Stand" amd "1984".

Either as a cautionary political statement or written for cynical amusement, George Orwell?s ?1984? and Stephen King?s ?The Stand?, respectively, make enthusiastic approaches to presenting a world of inevitable defeat, each inadvertently showcasing a depressing futility in attempting to recover or rebel. Where in 1984 the narrative solely follows the character Winston Smith, a sufferer of the notoriously powerful, and seemingly invincible Big Brother party, we are given a more natural instigation for such suffering in The Stand. Depicting a world reduced to ruin by a fatal and contagious virus, titled ?Captain Trips?, Stephen King makes use of a more omniscient narrative, providing a vast array of over 20 perspectives ranging from a simple East Texan factory worker, to a kind-hearted deaf-mute, an embittered antisocial pyromaniac, and a one-hit wonder rockstar; all to better portray the desperate social state brought so hastily upon the United States of America. It is this contrast in narrative structure, as well as each novels use of pathos and dark imagery, reminiscence of the past, symbolisms of hope and rebellion, and the presentation of corrupt authority which bring these dystopias to life in a way that not only leaves the reader alarmed, but also compelled to speculate on their realism and validity.

Prominently present in both novels, the dark and pathos imagery used to present defeat and futility proves to be a key facet in setting up a formidable dystopian premise. An example of this occurs at the end of the first book of The Stand, in Chapter 42, where one of the main characters, Frannie Goldsmith, is described because ?her dark eyes and hair accentuated a look that could be taken for dewy helplessness?, as well as relating her face to ?an unfolding map of tragic country?, which gives the reader an indication of the characters distression having seen their families and individual lifestyles destroyed by the disease. Also, while Stephen King makes a great use of dialogue in The Stand, he also makes sure to provide a descriptive outlook on the inanimate objects that make up their ruinous world, where even a stone is noted in Chapter 39 for ?looking like a terrible eye, bloody and half-open?, leaving the reader no escape from the constant flow of negativity. Equally, the application of pathetic fallacy proves effective in bringing a sense of drama and pathos to certain scenes, an example being the death of Larry Underwood?s mother in Chapter 19, where at its climax ?it began to splatter rain?, only adding to an already well established image of desparacy and depression. In these ways, Stephen King exercises a jungle of literary devices to prove the relentless bleakness of this sorrowful reality, much akin to George Orwell?s approach to the dystopian formula.
As a comparison, Orwell?s renowned classic 1984 makes use of a similar array of literary devices to depict an extremist communist state, where themes of futility and depression are most notable. To aid these themes, in Chapter 5 Part 1, he allows the protagonist, Winston, to break away from the normalized perception of the world, where in brief realization he describes the canteen at the Chestnut Tree Caf? for what it really is, ?a low ceilinged, crowded room, its walls grimy from the contact of innumerable bodies?. From this he spawns a list of negative notations in extension to his new-found criticism of his surroundings, including observations of the ?battered metal tables?, ?dented spoons?, ?coarse white mugs?, as well as smelling out the ?sourish composite smell of bad gin and bad coffee?. This wealth of pessimistic sensory imagery marks the subtle instigation of Winston?s rebellion against the Big Brother party, which manifests itself into a more active standing as the story progresses. In addition to this, in Chapter 9 Part 2, Orwell depicts the stranglehold Big Brother has over Oceania as the result of ?endless purges, arrests, tortures, imprisonments and vaporizations?, described through the means of Emmanuel Goldstein?s book, ?The Theory and Practice of Oligarchical Collectivism?, which ironically, turns out to be written by the party itself to lure potential rebels such as Winston. Covering the element of defeat, it later goes on to describe futility in even commencing resistance, explaining that a ?citizen of Oceania is like a man in interstellar space, who has no way of knowing which direction is up and which is down?, spelling out the weakness of the ?proles?, and even the outer-party members who are of a slightly higher status in the hierarchy of Big Brother. This is to highlight the strength of ?doublethink?, a concept which involves the relentless enforcement of two contradictory views to ensure historical, political and social confusion and disorientation among Oceania?s population, a device to sustain absolute control. In these ways, while the originations of such dystopias are at a dissimilarity, one being natural, one being human, both Stephen King and George Orwell successfully present unforgettably dismal worlds in their relative works, and in comparison deliver this by similar means. However, if there is one contrast worthy of mention, it is in the portrayal of control, where the cause for futility in resistance in The Stand is down to the lack thereof to contain the virus, whereas in 1984 it is the unbreakable chain of the ominous Big Brother party that binds and overwhelms, leaving a nation helplessly defeated.

To accentuate the turmoil of the present, both novels make sure to include moments to reminisce on the past. In Chapter 36 of The Stand, after the deaths of her parents and her friends, and having had to bury them herself, Frannie Goldsmith pities the fact that ?ice cream and electric typewriters were a thing of the past?, noting that it ?made her feel sadly nostalgic?. This reflection on such simple objects belonging to the past serves as a hint to readers that what they have in their own lives, however big or small, should not be taken for granted. Even more emotive is the recollection of the people lost to the virus, as made example by Rita Lauder in Chapter 35, who comments to the recently befriended Larry Underwood on how when she was a little girl her father would say ?we?re going on a trip today?, later questioning ?do you remember how that was?? to further engross themselves in nostalgia. It is scenes such as this which bring about an atmosphere of loneliness and fear, and this is taken further by Stephen King, as he instantly after picks up on media items to which many readers would relate: cued by this nostalgia, Rita then goes on to refer to the popular Tolkein fantasy tale ?The Lord of The Rings?, quoting ?the way leads ever on? before accrediting its origin. Her recipient in conversation follows this up and recalls his mother suggesting ?that western you wanted to see is down at the Crest, Larry. Clint Eastwood. What do you say??, further depicting memory as both a beautiful strength, yet a painful weakness of humanity.
However, such popular culture references would certainly not be found in Orwell?s 1984, which, as such, is very much a key element of its plot. The cause being, in eliminating all truth and validity in the past through manipulation and ?rectification?, the Big Brother party victoriously moulds a reality to sustain enthusiasm and patriotism among its citizens. As a member of the Ministry of Truth, Winston proves to be a very useful character in depicting this process, and it highlights its almost invisible margin of error, emphasizing the importance of the role of the human memory in calculating the truth in the past. Also, thanks to Winston?s interest in the issue, we find out in Chapter 8 Part 1 that even memory has its limits in terms of reliability, when he interviews an old prole to understand but one thing: ?do you feel you have more freedom now than you had in those days??. After much repetition of this same question, Winston helplessly reaches the conclusion that the old mans memory was ?nothing but a rubbish-heap of details?, thus proving to himself and the reader that even the human mind can be overwritten to a degree. An interesting comparison can be drawn in this way, where in The Stand there was an abundance of material remaining from the past, constantly reminding the few survivors of the virus of all they had lost, the world Winston lives in denies any such recollection to be made, as Big Brother even invades the privacy of thought. However, this is also allows for the heightened significance of instances where memories can successfully be recalled, as shown during Julia?s description of her past in Chapter 3 Part 2, where she comments on how she had previously ?been captain of the hockey team and had won the gymnastics trophy two years running?, which succeeds in denoting a rare case of positive expression in the book, ultimately showing the value of true memory.
This theme of memory strikes a deep contrast between the two accounts of fiction in subject; where The Stand presents a struggle to avoid any such recollection of the past to evade emotional pain, the characters of 1984 struggle in the opposite direction, desperate in their limitations to rediscover the lost thoughts, feelings and knowledge long destroyed or manipulated by Big Brother.

The desire to seek out the glory of the past, in all its melancholy, does come of one positive thing: a strongly optimistic vision for the future. Scattered throughout both dystopian novels are symbolisms of hope, in most cases represented by nature. This is shown in Chapter 36 of The Stand, where Frannie Goldsmith takes a visit to a park after her friend Gus Dinsmore dies, during which she ?sits there beside the duck pond, idly throwing stones in and watching the ripples spread in the calm water until they reached the lily pads?, lightening the tone slightly. This serene and peaceful description brings a relief to the reader, having endured chapter after chapter of suffering and death. This idea of nature acting as an escapism from the dire present reality and a representation of hope is supported in Chapter 35, where Larry Underwood observes sarcastically that ?birds are immune to the virus, good for them?, in seeing a mother feed her baby chicks, safe in a nest above.
Hope is symbolised in a similar way in 1984, where a woodland scene in Chapter 2 Part 2 sees Julia and Winston separate themselves from the rigid urban society upheld by Big Brother, and witness together ?boughs of elm trees swaying perceptibly in the breeze?, which Winston then connotates with his image of a personal utopia, the ?Golden Country?. This image then becomes ever more romantic, bordering on clich?, as ?a thrush alights on the bough not five metres away? and then ?begins to pour forth a torrent of song?, bringing a very idyllic scene to the minds of readers, which many would agree to be a just description of a utopia. Later, this hope transfers into rebellion, where the room above Mr Charrington?s shop becomes not just a hideout, centre to their rebellion, but a place to emulate the past. This is practised by Julia especially, who in Chapter 4 Part 2 voices that ?in this room I?m going to be a woman, not a party comrade?, by dressing herself up in a frock and ?painting her face?. This silent act of rebellion helps to redeem hope within Winston and Julia, who in having a bearing on the culture of the past, garner hope for the future.
While both 1984 and The Stand provide these hopeful gestures, they are never further explored, but instead used as bait to convince the reader of a happy ending before mercilessly snatching it away upon reaching their conclusions. The fact that this false sense of security toys with the readers emotion makes these dystopias even more daunting and horrifying; to realize that even the greatest prospects of hope are defeated leaves a greater comprehension of the futility in future resistance.

In presenting failure in hope, both The Stand and 1984 emphasise the strength of their respective antagonists. In The Stand there are but two enemies; Randall Flagg, a satanic embodiment of evil that is presented as the cause of the virus, and the ruthless American government, desperately aiming to contain the virus and avoid an national, or even global epidemic. The character of Randall Flagg is very much against the theme of the initial premise of The Stand, where in principle the idea of a killer disease spreading and wiping out humanity is quite plausible and realistic. However, with this character we are introduced to a more fantasy horror element: described as ?the dark man? with a ?fiery grin that made mothers grab up their children and pull them in the house?, his magical ability becomes evident after, in Chapter 23 ?the rundown heels of his boots begin to rise off the road?. His presence in Stephen King?s dystopian tale even extends to the narratives of the other characters, where every survivors nightmare includes him posing as the cause of the killer disease, giving the reader a clear depiction of personified antagonism, where protagonism is scarcely established among the divided survivors. In addition to this, as the story progresses, we see the authority in the USA break under the pressure of the fast spreading virus, and from this fear we notice the birth of corruption. Their desparacy to control the American masses and avoid riots leads them to censor the media, where in Chapter 26 we see Stu Redman watch the six o clock news on TV, to find that the ?flu epidemic? is reported as ?nothing to really worry about?, downplaying the urgency of the situation. However, as the virus itself spreads further and further beyond the governments control, we see radio talk show presenter Ray Flowers, in chapter 26, rebelliously announce to the public that he ?has been ordered to shut down, but have refused the order?, describing how the ?men are acting like Nazi?s, not American Soldiers? before being shot to death by the sabotaging authority, openly showing their ruthlessness and distression to the public. Ultimately, the government does not succeed in oppressing the masses, as the virus itself infiltrates their ranks, where in chapter 26 even the president suffers from ?a spasm of sneezes?, ironically during his speech to the nation, where he vainly attempts to persuade that they?re suffering from ?a moderate outbreak of influenza, no more, no less?.
On the other hand, the corrupt authority that leads Big Brother in 1984 unflinchingly sustains control over Oceania every step of the way until the novels infamously bitter end. Emmanuel Goldstein?s book, in Chapter 8 Part 2, addresses this description, by declaring that Big brother ?not only enforces obedience to the will of the state, but attains complete uniformity of all opinion on all subjects?, and that they ?control everything in Oceania, and because of this, disposes of products as they see fit?. The most controversial aspect of the oppression depicted in 1984 is in the governments ability to not only control physicality, but the mentality of its citizens as well. Yet again, Goldstein?s book covers this issue, in explaining that ?the prevailing mental condition must be controlled insanity?, alluding to the concepts of ?doublethink?, and ?thoughtcrime?, showing the unscrupulous nature of the Oceanic philosophy of Ingsoc. To further the presentation of antagonism in the novel we are introduced to O?Brien, who by authority of Big Brother is sent to ?cure? Winston. In Chapter 2 Part 3, during the torture scene, he is described for his ?heavy lined faced, so ugly yet so intelligent?, and in this way is very much portrayed as a formidable and ominous adversary, citing the Big Brother ambition ?we are solely interested in power? proudly, making detestability that much more justified.
Ultimately, the main difference between the presentations of the two governmental powers in each novel, as said before, is that of control. Where in The Stand the US government start off with power and authority over its people, but by its conclusion lose it to the riots and hysteria that overwhelms the nation, whereas the Big brother party start off with power, and by 1984?s conclusion still reign with their control unrelinquished. However while the government in The Stand is still active, it proves to be just as immoral and ruthless as that of Big Brother, in choosing to even, according to the comments of a reluctant US soldier in Chapter 26, ?mow kids down with machine guns?, later adding ?it?s a slaughter?. Regardless, both forms of oppression succeed in disgusting its readership, as well as further engrossing them in alluringly shocking dystopias.

To conclude, despite being written as premonitions for years that have already passed, both 1984 and The Stand endure the test of time through clever presentations of the curiously compelling dystopian premise. Through inclusion of pathos description and dark imagery, as well as contrasting presentations of a past or former glory, we as readers oversee an inevitable failure on the protagonists part in both novels, also witnessing the succession of oppressive forces, be it the fatal virus or a corrupt leadership. Teasingly, this inevitability is distorted before each novels conclusion through symbolisms of hope and rebellion, which while ultimately crushed, challenge the readers predictions on the outcome, momentarily leading their expectations of a dystopian novel astray, which in this avid readers opinion, makes each of the two reading experiences that much more exciting and memorable.

End

All of thats obsolete, so if you can get over how boring the entire thing is, then do what you will with it. Anyway, its time to get working on a completely different version.
*Sighs*