Comments: 40
Wisky-08 [2017-11-09 00:09:37 +0000 UTC]
Nice
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
BaneEden [2013-12-14 22:48:27 +0000 UTC]
There's so much in 1984 that it really takes awhile for my mind to fully understand. I had to re-read the book about three times now, since I either lost track or I completely misunderstood the whole novel. I have an extreme love for 1984, it's very haunting in its own way.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
HyperSonicXdA [2013-08-23 23:05:19 +0000 UTC]
You know, this kind of world wouldn't have been very far off. If Japan hadn't attacked Pearl Harbor this might very well be how the world would look now.
For Eurasia, it's clear how that came to be. In the book it says mainland Europe was conquered by Russia. There's no doubt that that could've happened. After, the Russian army had completely devastated the Wehrmacht in the battle of Kursk, so without a D-day landing, who's to say Stalin would've stopped at Berlin and not moved on to France? No doubt he could.
As for Oceania, well, the US had pretty much become the lifeline of the UK by the end of 1940 (lend-lease and stuff like that). Absorption into the US would be a simple next step. After all, that would excuse Britain from having to pay for those supplies. Latin America is a bit harder, but conquest or annexation would speed things up a little.
And then there's Eastasia. Slight deviation from the book here, since in the book China is the central power, whereas if we follow WWII logic Japan would be the dominant force. Now, thanks to the US the British could supply troops to Burma and retaliate from India, but without it, the UK would be helpless in defending its overseas colonies. This would allow Japan to take some control of the contested area, until the US could seize it back later.
The establishment of a communist dictatorship is easy to explain in Eurasia and Eastasia (China and Japan both had an absolutist tendency), but in Oceania a second October revolution would be needed for such a government to take hold. Nonetheless, that would be possible.
In brief, America joining the war really did prevent a disaster. In other words, we owe Japan the world as we know it today.
👍: 1 ⏩: 0
theragonlord-d [2012-09-10 04:41:06 +0000 UTC]
If I were thrown into that world, I try to raise an army in the contested areas. I have read the book. first task build WMDs and blow them up in high atmostsphere over the major cities in the 1984 book prior to an attack. it will cause an EMP which equals mass chaos because big brother can't calm the people.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
WingedReaver In reply to theragonlord-d [2013-04-18 13:29:37 +0000 UTC]
The contested territories aren't left alone by the three superpowers. They are contested, as in, constantly fought over. Some day your army would blunder in on the clashes, and probably be annihilated.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
theragonlord-d In reply to WingedReaver [2013-04-19 20:00:30 +0000 UTC]
That's why first you go all assassin's creed and slowly influence and find those who want change. you rot it from the inside, plant seeds of doubt. In the book it seem like the war was really a thursday war: a simulate war. that really they just trade rebels to claim they are winning
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Jason-Jamey In reply to theragonlord-d [2013-02-10 15:00:30 +0000 UTC]
Read about a ton of it myself. But I know that even THIS isn't 100% safe.
To start with, you'd have the natural disasters and other risks outside the planet to worry about.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Jason-Jamey [2011-09-30 03:46:14 +0000 UTC]
Wonder how things would change if all of a sudden, Gordon Freeman entered the war.
He was able to tackle a situation like this with little or help before.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Qaaf [2010-12-24 17:51:18 +0000 UTC]
Long description is long
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Fan-tastic [2010-07-30 02:28:15 +0000 UTC]
I could just have read it wrong, but it looks to me like Eurasia controls more territory than it should, namely in North Africa as well as the swath through Pahkistan and India. It would probably occupy these areas very frequently, but I don't see any evidence they were part of the homeland.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
SingingShooter [2010-03-12 22:35:36 +0000 UTC]
thank you a lot for making this, I am currently reading 1984 and all the different names and their locations were confusing me until now
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
rubixspoly [2009-12-26 03:46:20 +0000 UTC]
what is litterally the most unexplored country the world like what are the most unexplored countries
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
ShadowSora94 In reply to rubixspoly [2010-03-11 03:14:57 +0000 UTC]
All the countries have been explored and stuff. 1984 takes place in a totaltarinistic Post-WWII world. But as a result of the war between Oceania, Eastasia, and Eurasia, many other countries have completly collapsed.
Either that, or the Party (the single-party of Oceania) just doesn't bother to talk about them.
👍: 1 ⏩: 0
GeneralHelghast [2009-12-01 03:42:31 +0000 UTC]
Well, if the nation is called Oceania, then the capital has to be somewhere in Australia or New Zealand. Possibly Big Brother was Australian.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
GeneralHelghast [2009-11-12 03:17:30 +0000 UTC]
and if u mean oceania, you mean by australia becoming its own empire, colonizing britain for abusing australia and conquering south africa and America for ignoring it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
ShadowSora94 In reply to GeneralHelghast [2010-03-11 01:54:39 +0000 UTC]
Well, I don't think it began there.
The book stated that Oceania began as a result as a mergence of America and the British Empire, not as a revolution in Australia. Why it's exactly named Oceania when Australia and New Zealand aren't even significent at all to the story is unknown- it's implied it's mostly named Oceania because of the oceans surrounding it's lands, serving as it's natural defense.
Oceania doesn't have a single capital.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
GeneralHelghast In reply to ShadowSora94 [2010-03-11 02:14:24 +0000 UTC]
lol. OCEANIA is in the Pacific, stupid. That means that I was right. But USA can't consume the British because they're a democratic-republic. Britain, however, is a monarchy, so britain had to consume USA.It fits more better than USA consuming Britain because as a democracy, USA isn't allowed to declare wars. Since you are pro-socialist, I suggest you keep your ideals to yourself because its socialism that is a command economy, but is not like communism.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
ShadowSora94 In reply to GeneralHelghast [2010-03-11 03:16:00 +0000 UTC]
NOW do you understand what i'm trying to say?
(forgot to include this in last reply)
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
ShadowSora94 In reply to GeneralHelghast [2010-03-11 03:19:28 +0000 UTC]
Ok, happy to see what got that cleared up.
I can't say I don't see what you're saying though, some things you say do make sense. However, it's just not what Orwell had in mind.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
ShadowSora94 In reply to GeneralHelghast [2010-03-11 03:13:04 +0000 UTC]
*sigh*
1.) I am perfectly aware of the geographical location of Oceania. Orwell just chose that name while writing 1984.
2.) The whole point of the story is to show the horrors of totaltarianism- to make a better point, rather then creating a new and imaginary world, he created a horrifying post-WWII world. And in it, he made it so America consumed the British Empire and the rest of the Americas.
3.) I'm aware of my country's government.
4.) I'm not pro-socialist, but I acknowledge that democratic socialisms can exist.
5.) I think it's safe to say that Orwell made America the bad guy for this reason- to show that even the people/countries with the best of reputations for what it stands for, can fall victim to greed and power. In this story, America fell victim and decided to consume everything around it for more power. Even the constitutional monarchy that was once a world power could survive the power of the most powerful country in all the world. Don't like it? Go ask Orwell about that when you die.
6.) Why are you attacking me on all of this? I'm just trying to tell you about the novel, which you are confused on in some areas, which is clearly evident.
7.) One last time- while it would seem Britan is a better fit for becoming a supernation in such a story, it didn't. In fact, Oceania renamed Britan "Airstrip One", and it is refered to as such in the story. If Britan was in charge of everything, do you think they would have allowed themselves to just be renamed "Airstrip One" out of all things? No, Britan had no control in the whole matter. That's just how things were in the novel, ok? I didn't write it, i'm just trying to tell you about how it works.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
ShadowSora94 In reply to Legionare117 [2010-11-12 12:57:13 +0000 UTC]
People acting this stupid when I'm just trying to point out something about a novel before I was even born then talking about it like I had written it just peeves me off- just wanted to make sure I got the message across for good.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
E-FAUN [2009-08-24 20:40:26 +0000 UTC]
brilliant. Just like the novel
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
DrunkardHu [2009-07-13 07:56:08 +0000 UTC]
I am really happy to meet other Orwell fans out there. George Orwell is indeed a prophet for the novel Animal Farm. Commies acted completely accorded to this novel nearly word by word.
I'll finish reading this when I done reading 1984 in order not to spoil it. Right now I am half way through it. At the point that Winston and Julia had their affair for a while. But nevertheless I really like this map you did.
A friend of mine (the same friend who got me into reading 1984) even mentioned the possiblity Orwell may unintentionally showed the Commies how to control the people. Whether Orwell foretold the Commie atrocities or the Commies read his book and did everything accordingly, George Orwell is the prophet of our time for sure.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Richard-Onasi In reply to DrunkardHu [2009-07-17 02:40:40 +0000 UTC]
Thanks, he is one of my favoruite authors.
I hope you enjoy the book and the summary i wrote.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Chris000 [2009-06-23 03:07:17 +0000 UTC]
I remember reading this book last year in English. George Orwell is a genius and accurately depicted what this day and age would sort of look like, minus the totalitarian psychotic socialist government. You certainly have a lot of time on your hands. I bet your fingers were bleeding after writing that!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Richard-Onasi In reply to Chris000 [2009-06-23 17:23:31 +0000 UTC]
Yes he was, its too bad he died in 1950. I wonder what else he would have written had he not died then.
Yes that is more or less how they felt after I had finished it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
GeneralZadrek [2008-12-15 22:01:51 +0000 UTC]
What a long summary... Quite possible among the longest ones I've ever seen or read.
Anyway, when I was reading the book, I was always wondering if the three super-states even existed, or if the whole war was just one of the Party's schemes to control the population. The constant, neverending war and the whole system was indeed rather... nightmarish. Still, very addicting and interesting book.
If I had to choose, I'd live in Eurasia!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Richard-Onasi In reply to GeneralZadrek [2008-12-16 05:45:20 +0000 UTC]
First, I would like to thank you for reading the summary, I honestly believed that no one would read the whole thing!
Second, As stated in the summary the three super-states do not differ in idealogy or on the general level of technology; they could easily combine to form a world government. But that would end the war between them, which is the only reason for the division. Without the war their economies, which are essential for the Ruling Classes of all three nations to keep their citizens in their place, would change. Also there would be no enemy to rally the people against, which is neccesarry to keep them loyal to the Government.
And third, what prompted you to choose Eurasia? Western Europe and European Russia, which make up the nation's core regions, were hit hard during the atomic war and most of its major cities probably never fully recovered. They most likely lie in horrible disrepair. If I had a choice I would probably live in Oceania, somewhere in South America or Australia both of which probably suffered only minor damage as a result.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
GeneralZadrek In reply to Richard-Onasi [2008-12-16 13:15:32 +0000 UTC]
I chose Eurasia simply because its political ideology is at least somewhat familiar. We don't really get any information about the "Death-worship" or any other aspect of the Eastasians, but they just sound too weird and, well, suicidal... Oceanian Ingsoc on the other hand is rather nightmarish ideology (unless you're one of the inner party, of course) so, while I by no means support "Neo-Boshevism", at least I know (to some extent) what to expect...
Of course it could be that the Eurasian "Neo-Bolshevism" is Neo-Bolshevism as much the Oceanian "Ingsoc" is socialism... But I wouldn't know it until it was too late.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Richard-Onasi In reply to GeneralZadrek [2008-12-18 03:54:54 +0000 UTC]
You have got a point. And after thinking about it I have revoked my statement about living in Oceania. I would gather up a group of Proles and Thought Criminals from the Outer Party, like Winston, and take them to South America. There we would build a space craft in secret and use it to construct a space colony. It would be similiar to our space shuttles, meaning reusable. It would be used to take supplies up to the construction site, located probably at L5, and reenter to pick up more supplies. We would probably not be discovered, we would be using random launch sites deep in the jungle. The three super states have little to none space cability so we could not be followed. It would take a long time but the chance for a place where men can be free would motivate us to success. It would have to be able to produce its own food ,air, and power so we colud stay indefinitely.
What do you think?
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Neetsfagging322297 In reply to Richard-Onasi [2012-02-20 13:54:22 +0000 UTC]
One thing I have thought, a group decides to hijack telescreens transmissions and present a video showing Big Brother himself, Big Brother greets his people then denounces the Inner Party, accusing it of betraying the revolution and its own principles.
Even more, he insists that Emmanuel Goldstein is not an opponement hidding in ennemy territory but the one that lead this betrayal, to become the true current leader of Oceania, silently sabotaging it from within and preventing victory against the ennemy but that the ennemy´s own incompetence have thus so far prevented it from defeating Oceania, even after a generation of warfare and knowing everything about the Oceanian military.
He explains that the treacherous monster eventually came to that realization also and have build a serie of hidden shelters, including an outragely luxuous palace for himself, to survive the atomic war he intend to start in order to destroy Oceania, betraying even his foreign supporters in doing so.
He end his message with a call for glorious revolution against Emmanuel Goldstein and his deranged lackeys.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
GeneralZadrek In reply to Richard-Onasi [2008-12-19 11:53:56 +0000 UTC]
That would be extremely hard if not impossible. While building your launch site you'd be at constant risk of being detected, and I'm not sure from where you could find all the raw materials and technology needed to build a spacecraft (from the "rocket bombs", perhaps?).
Besides, if one of the superstates detected your colony (sooner or later that would happen), all three of them would suddenly be very interested in space research, just to come after you and make you love the Big Brother/Comrade Stalin (or whoever "leads" the Eurasia)/Great Leader Mao (or whoever "leads" the Eastasia)...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Richard-Onasi In reply to GeneralZadrek [2008-12-19 15:22:08 +0000 UTC]
I admit it would be hard, but our desire for freedom would spur us on to success. And if they came after us we would develop nuclear missiles and fire them at the surface and wipe them out. I would feel sad about all the innocents we would Inadvertently kill but once we destroy organized society we could rebuild again.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
GeneralHelghast In reply to Tonoski [2009-11-12 03:16:08 +0000 UTC]
lol, dumb anarchist. peace is peace. war is war.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Richard-Onasi In reply to Tonoski [2009-05-09 09:29:01 +0000 UTC]
First thank you for reading the summary and commenting, it took a while for me to type it up and after I was done I was worried no one would read it.
I didn't state it out right but it is implied when it talks about the qualities of Party Members and how there must be a continual state of war because this focuses their attention on the external "threat" so they do not notice what their Government is doing. There is little true loyalty in the older Outer Party members or the Proles, but these people don't really matter to the Inner Party. The younger generation (the one after Julia's) is pretty much completely brainwashed to have absolute loyalty to Big Brother. There is a war it is just not a true war (like the world wars), its purpose is to destroy what is produced so that their is no surplus, this keeps the people's standard of living from rising while focusing their attention on the "war".
There are alot of places in Siberia where one could hide and have low chance of being discovered by the Government.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0