Skinner, 1

A Psychoanalytic and Marxist Reading of Orwells Language in 1984

George Orwells 1984 is a work that has embedded itself into the cultural ethos since the
time of its publication. The dystopia he presents is nightmarish, but the true nightmare vision of
his work is the process by which this world where five means four and freedom means
enslavement comes to exist. Many perspectives have been offered on Orwells masterpiece, and
many critics have lauded their particular positions. Two of the most fruitful avenues of
investigation for 1984 are Marxist and psychoanalytical criticism. Both theories offer a unique
yet complimentary position on the use and effect of language on the individual and the whole.
Through the lenses of psychoanalytic and Marxist theories, George Orwells 1984 exemplifies a
totalitarian dystopia in order to display the effect of the use and abuse of language upon the
human experience.
Hans Bertens notes that Marxist critics view literature with Marxs understanding that
the mode of production of material life conditions the general process of social, political, and
intellectual life (81). This understanding of how the experienced world is ordered emphasizes
the role of the working/producing class in a whole new way and creates a literary theory that
desires and is able to answer questions in regards to society as a whole. Marxist theory sees this
focus on production as a key factor in the disparity between classes, a disparity that takes front
stage in Marxist criticism. Psychoanalytic criticism addresses many of the same topics as a
Marxist, but does so from a much more individualized and sub-surface perspective.
Psychoanalytic theory is concerned with the unconscious and how the unconscious manifests
itself (i.e. dream interpretation, oedipal complex, projection and repression, etc.). The two
theories offer different perspectives, but they also work quite well together-especially in regards
to 1984. Marxist criticism looks at the world from the perspective of the masses (e.g. Oceania as

Skinner, 2

a whole), while psychoanalytic theory examines the world from the perspective of the individual
(e.g. Winston Smith as an individual). While each can be used, each also sees its own
conclusions as ultimate. Lois Tyson illustrates this in regards to Marxist theory when explaining
the driving force of Marxist theory as opposed to psychoanalytical. Her hypothetical Marxist
theorist would argue that by focusing our attention on the individual psyche and its roots in the
family complex, psychoanalysis distracts our attention from the real forces that create human
experience: the economic systems that structure human societiesIf a theory does not
foreground the economic realities of human culture, then it misunderstands human culture (52).
Both offer unique understandings of the role of language, and, especially in regards to a work
like 1984, this perspective is exceedingly beneficial. Language is robust; it can operate in a
constructive manner (like a tool), or it can be utilized to destroy (like a weapon).
Language is a tool that has a great impact upon people as individuals and societies as a
whole. Beyond simply communicating information and ideas from one person to another,
language has the ability to create what it calls. Speech act theorist have argued for this
understanding for some time, and the truth of the matter seems virtually recognized. However,
the fact that language can do more than simply communicate does not negate the fact that it is a
means of communication as well. These aspects of language affect people greatly. In a positive
sense, language can unite. Common language leads to a common culture that gives rise to
community. Language can also be used to bridge a gap between different communities when
people make that effort. Language is a constructive tool when intentioned to be so.
This is not how language was used in in Orwells Oceania. Winston Smith lived in a
world of constant contradiction. His world was controlled but chaotic; always at war but never
engaging in battle; believing the danger was from without when it was always from within.

Skinner, 3

Since about that time, war had been literally continuous, though strictly speaking it had not
always been the same war (Orwell 64.1). Oceanias constant war (i.e. Oceanias ubiquitous
propaganda campaign) is a perfect example of Oceanias abuse of language. The struggle
between classes (specifically the tendency of the ruling class to subjugate the lower class) is a
recurring theme in Marxist theory and is illustrated perfectly in the depictions of Ingsocs war
propaganda. But propaganda was not the only culprit Orwell identified in 1984. Both a Marxist
and psychoanalytical reading will note the governments unbridled control of how the people are
able to speak, thus how they are able to think (psychoanalytic) and corporately act (Marxist).
Newspeak and its partner, Doublethink, are also examples of Oceanias corrupted
relationship with language. Newspeak is the Orwellian term for the official language of
Oceaniadevised to meet the ideological needs of Ingsoc (Orwell 576). Orwell adds that,
(t)he purpose of Newspeak was not only to provide a medium of expression for the world-view
and mental habits proper to the devotees of Ingsoc, but to make all other modes of thought
impossible. It was intended that when Newspeak had been adopted once and for all and Oldspeak
forgotten, a heretical thoughtthat is, a thought diverging from the principles of Ingsocshould
be literally unthinkable (576). One important Newspeak term is Doublethink. Doublethink, one
of the sacred principles of Ingsoc, (57) is the ability to believe two contradictory thoughts at
the same time. Both Newspeak and Doublethink required a less-than-faithful relationship with
language, one that the leaders of Oceania bred into the populace and used to control the actions
of the masses and the experience of the individual.
So even though language can be a constructive tool that creates, communicates, unites,
and frees, it is the opposite of this in Oceania. Instead of creating, language is used to destroy;
instead of communicating, it confuses; instead of uniting, it divides; and instead of freeing the

Skinner, 4

citizens of Oceania, it divides them. Both the Marxist and psychoanalytical theories offer insight
on this phenomenon. Where the Marxist reading focuses on the effects of this abuse of language,
psychoanalytic theory offers an idea as to why manipulations in language are so effective.
Patriotism thrives in times of national threat, and this is a truth that easily can be
manipulated. During times of conflict, questioning those in charge is seen as traitorous
blasphemy and is likely to land the transgressor in the crosshairs of many, sometimes literally.
That makes times of conflict ripe opportunities for abuse of power. Forced labor camps, wiretapping, torture, and the abandonment of a host of personal civil liberties are not simply blights
on German history. These transgressions, and more, occurred in the Land of the Free and all in
the name of the protection of ones country. A key tenet of Marxist ideology is the advocacy of a
peasant revolt that would close the gap between the proletariat and the working class, as well as
wrestle control away from those in power. A simple, yet proven effective, way to guard against a
revolt is to focus the populaces energy on an invading enemy. The Ingsoc government of
Oceania recognized this and ensured that the proles always had an enemy to fight against and to
fear; and, with Big Brothers help, to hopefully defeat. This constant threat led to a people
willing to do anything (and allow anything to be done) to ensure their own peace, safety, and
unquestioned patriotism remained intact. They could echo the thoughts of Winstons 39-year-old,
mother-of-four, fitness-instructor: We dont all have the privilege of fighting in the front line,
but at least we can all keep fit. Remember our boys on the Malabar front! And the sailors in the
Floating Fortresses! Just think what they have to put up with (69.5). Ingsocs propaganda made
certain that Oceania had a citizenry that would never come close to rising up against the tyrants
in charge.

Skinner, 5

Ingsocs control of language aided in these efforts. Not only were the people united in
fear, they were becoming less and less capable to even voice dissent, to others and even to
themselves. The very slogans that the controlling Party based its control on where Doublethink
that required Newspeak to be effective: War is Peace; Freedom is Slavery; Ignorance is
Strength (11). The way that Newspeak operated in regards to these concepts shows how
Oceanias ruling party engaged the minds of each citizen and the actions of the whole: All
words grouping themselves round the concepts of liberty and equality, for instance, were
contained in the single word crimethink, while all words grouping themselves round the concepts
of objectivity and rationalism were contained in the single word oldthink (589). Roger Fowler
notes that, Orwell does understand that there are vital relationships between language and
thought, and he does believe that clear thought can be helped or hindered by language choice
(93) even if he also argues that Orwells introduction of Newspeak was to satirize the hubris of
totalitarian regimes rather than speak prophetically about what he saw as possible in the future.
Regardless, Orwells attention and the intentions of fictional and real regimes to control language
both emphasize the psychological and sociological (e.g. Marxist) importance of language
control.
A Marxist reading of 1984 highlights the distinction between classes and the tumult that
this causes. Its lack is in recognition of how this applies to the internal life of the individual.
Marxist theory illuminates societal issues at large (like thought police patrolling the minds of the
people), but it sheds little light on the inner struggles that Winston has (like his lack of love for
his wife, his relationship with Julia, and his willingness to sacrifice others to save himself).
A psychoanalytical reading of the situation of Oceania is similar to the Marxist yet
distinct. Whereas the Marxist reading examines how effective the Oceanias abuse of language

Skinner, 6

is, the psychoanalytic perspective examines why it is so. Freuds theory of the uncanny sheds
light on how Big Brother is able to manipulate the people of Oceania to such a degree with the
threat of war. This is due to the aesthetics of anxiety. If beauty is simply an inhibited aim:
that is, as a sublimated reflection or manifestation of our erotic instincts and impulses (Gray),
then something that ensures the opportunity to mate is as attractive as the potential mate himself
or herself. Psychoanalytical theory deals with this in one way with the theory of the uncanny.
The uncanny specifically is the class of frightening things that leads us back to what is known
and familiar (Gray). The reactions of the people of Oceania to the Ingsoc propaganda against
the enemy of the moment that always represented absolute evil (65.4) is to be driven back to
what is known and familiar.
The redefinition of words, and how that affects the human mind, is interesting from a
psychoanalytic perspective. The goal of Newspeak was not merely to control the actions of the
people. The goal of Newspeak was to create the reality of Doublethink; it was to alter the inner,
personal, psychological experience of the individual. Winston wrote in his diary that Freedom is
the freedom to say that two plus two equals four (479). Doublethink was achieved in most by
means of Newspeak, but some, like Winston, needed a visit to the Ministry of Love to be
convinced that, if the Party said two and two made five, then it made five. And it was not
enough for the people to say that they believed, the belief must be genuine. Simply controlling
the actions of the people was not sufficient, the psychological experience of the individual was
subject to the Party. Harold Bloom points out this preparatory assault that Winston, and all of the
citizens, personally experienced when he wrote, The destruction of personality [the individual]
OBrien proposes, undertakes, and achieves has already been prepared by the erosion of personal

Skinner, 7

identity in Oceania, an erosion accomplished by the steady chipping away of memory by its
institutions, by Doublethink and the memory hole and the Ministry of Truth (59).
Writing about 1984 in the year 1984, Raymond Williams notes a current, obvious case
of Doublethink when the radical Right, now in power in so many countries, denounce the state at
the level of social welfare or economic justice but reinforce and applaud the state at the level of
patriotic militarism, uniform loyalty, and control over local democratic institutions (23).
Williams would see the same type of Doublethink on the far right today, as well as the far left.
Neither is the middle immune from this Orwellian virus. The truth is that the issue of
Doublethink, as well as Orwellian insights such as the memory hole, Newspeak, and constant
surveillance (whether of the self-inflicted sort, like social media or perpetuated by government)
are alive and well in some form or fashion today. This reality makes Orwells work an insightful
examination of individuals and societies as a whole. The Marxist reading of 1984 examines
society as a whole while the psychoanalytical reading examines the minds and experiences of
each individual person. Instead of answering the question, for example, of why the propaganda
campaign keeps the people of Oceania in line (like a Marxist would), it addresses the question of
why the propaganda campaign affects Winston the way it does. Human nature, as explored
through the individual experience (psychoanalytical theory) and social dynamics (Marxist
theory), and influenced and/or controlled by the use and abuse of language makes the nightmare
Orwell envisaged an all-too-real possibility.

Skinner, 8

Works Cited
Bertens, Johannes Willem. Literary Theory: The Basics. London: Routledge, 2001. Print.
Bloom, Harold. Blooms Guides: George Orwell's 1984. Philadelphia: Chelsea House, 2003.
Print.
Gray, R. "Freud, The Uncanny". Washington.Edu, n.d. Web. 07 Apr. 2016.
<http://courses.washington.edu/freudlit/Uncanny.Notes.html>.
Orwell, George. 1984: A Novel. New York, NY: Signet Classic, 1989. Print.
Fowler, Roger. Newspeak and Language of the Party Blooms Modern Critical Interpretations:
George Orwell's 1984. Ed. Harold Bloom. New York: Chelsea House, 1987. 93-108.
Print.
Tyson, Lois. Critical Theory Today: A User-friendly Guide. New York: Garland Pub., 1999.
Print.
Williams, Raymond. Afterword: Nineteen Eighty-Four in 1984. Blooms Modern Critical
Interpretations: George Orwell's 1984. Ed. Harold Bloom. New York: Chelsea House,
1987. 9-30. Print.