Telegraph Writer on Orwell's 1984 Omits BBC

[Teddy Bear]

Consider this headline from the Telegraph yesterday:
George Orwell uncovered: A guided tour of the Ministry of Truth

For anybody who doesn't know, George Orwell is the author of 1984, the book that pretty much foretold the future that we now find ourselves in. One of the themes in it regards the Ministry of Truth, which today we see the parallel in the BBC. Perhaps unsurprisingly, Orwell worked for a time at the BBC.

So to see the headline for this article as above, I wanted to see what reference there would be to the BBC. Instead I read a piece that is intended to show just how literate and erudite the writer of it, one D J Taylor, using ten words when one would suffice, but has nothing of real substance.

Like with this paragraph:
Anyone bent on introducing Nineteen Eighty-Four to a contemporary audience has two tasks: to explain some of the bygone detail which is now in danger of getting obscured, and to unravel Orwell’s personal journey through this labyrinth of betrayal, back-stabbing and paranoia.

My initial reaction to his article was to make this comment:

Apparently the writer of this piece seems unable to see the forest for the trees.

Does the fact that Orwell worked for the BBC, and came up with the concept of ‘Ministry of Truth’ seem too remote or ‘obscure’ for you?
Either you are angling for a job with the BBC or have friends working there, that you want to maintain their ‘cover’.

Then I Googled the author of this piece, and now his agenda becomes clear, and how come the BBC is not associated with his piece on Orwell

DJ Taylor: All hail Patten, champion of a clever BBC

Orwell certainly saw him coming.

[Teddy Bear]

I have no doubt that the above piece in the Telegraph was orchestrated by the BBC with the intention to remove all trace in what was probably their role in causing Orwell to formulate 1984.

The BBC asks this question:What led avowed socialist George Orwell to write a novel beloved of the Right?

Well I'm no expert on Orwell, but knowing he worked for the BBC for a time and had direct experience of 'leftist thinking', I would imagine that had a lot to do with it.

So now we are going to experience the BBC manoeuvre themselves out of history by explaining it in every other way but themselves.

Here's what the BBC tell us about their programme being aired tomorrow at 9pm.

The Road to Nineteen Eighty-Four

What led avowed socialist George Orwell to write a novel beloved of the Right?

David Aaronovitch traces how a decade of political chaos shaped Orwell's vision of a totalitarian future.

He explores how, after the war, the threat of the new atom bomb played a crucial part in the birth of Nineteen Eighty-Four - and how Orwell coined the term 'cold war' in the process.

He traces the impact on the novel of the provocative ideas of an American ex-communist, James Burnham, who predicted a world dominated by three tyrannical superstates.

He finds out why Orwell saw some form of Western European Union as the best way to prevent Britain being swallowed by Big Brother.

And he asks why, if Orwell was an English socialist, the totalitarian party ruling 'Oceania' in Nineteen Eighty-Four is called 'IngSoc' - which is short for 'English Socialists'.

[steevo]

I was tempted to start spouting BBC examples too easy and I don't live there. You could write a library of consequences on the subject. The destruction of tradition, Judeo-Christian ethic, core values necessary to personal liberty (freedom with justice) has made it easier than ever to manipulate, creating 'reality'. If there is uncertainty with true conservatives it's a point of disagreement even mystery over the degree of delusion the Left believe, as opposed to knowingly deceive.

You can't know Orwell if you don't know history. Speaking of communism and the bomb I'm quickly reminded of a movie here that made a significant impact, Oliver Stone's "JFK". In reality President Kennedy was a tax-cutting cold warrior who twice tripled America's military presence in Viet Nam to try and stop the spread of communism, and risked nuclear disaster by standing up to the Soviets in Cuba. He was assassinated by Oswald, an America-hating leftist who once defected to the USSR. But we have Hollywood and what lives in our culture through a movie nominated for best picture. We've learned Kennedy was a peace-loving lefty contemplating withdrawal from Viet Nam. He was assassinated by a vast right-wing cabal one can be forgiven to believe included most of America, except Oliver Stone.

I'm no longer amazed at how distorted and turned on its head our past is portrayed. There is no longer the ability to learn from raw facts, past or present. All is continuously revised according to the correct emotion with an added benefit in know-it-all arrogance and cynical mockery.

[Teddy Bear]

I was reading this piece in Wikipedia on Big Brother:
A spontaneous ritual of devotion to Big Brother (“BB”) is illustrated at the end of the “Two Minutes Hate”:
At this moment the entire group of people broke into a deep, slow, rhythmic chant of ‘B-B! …. B-B! …. B-B!’—over and over again, very slowly, with a long pause between the first ‘B’ and the second—a heavy murmurous sound, somehow curiously savage,

Do you think he was hinting at something here, waiting for people to ‘get it’? Let’s see what do we know that starts B-B?

It's impressive how well you are able to see the real BBC considering how many thousands of miles you are out of their direct sphere Steevo.

Regarding Kennedy though, there is definitely something fishy about what really happened there. I thought that just from my own perceptions at the time. The most important man in the USA is murdered and the subsequent investigation was so poorly managed there had to be something going on. I only wish whoever was responsible would relieve us of Obama.

Regarding the left's degree of delusion and how much they consciously deceive. In their own minds they are deceiving themselves that they are right. Purposefully averting their consideration of facts that would confute what they want to believe is true. Once this is established as their mindset, it is not a major step to adopt other 'realities', even if they don't believe in their real basis, but it looks beneficial for their own greed to adopt it. Presenting deceptions, those that they genuinely believe, and those that they simply use, becomes their way of being.

[thehighlandrebel]

I'm no expert on Orwell but from what I can gather his views changed when he went to Burma as police chief for one of the provinces. In Burmese Days he writes about one incident when he had to lead a young local Burmese to the gallows for something trivial like stealing. He resigned his position after that and spent the rest of his life fighting for social issues.
When he joined the BBC he found that as the empire was fading the establishment could no longer control and manipulate a large part of the worlds population so they turned to manipulating and controlling the British people through the media, mainly the BBC.

He found this just as repulsive and as the saying goes the rest is history.

[Teddy Bear]

When he joined the BBC he found that as the empire was fading the establishment could no longer control and manipulate a large part of the worlds population so they turned to manipulating and controlling the British people through the media, mainly the BBC.

It's almost surreal what the BBC are doing with this programme on Orwell, and avoiding showing themselves as having anything to do with it. He could well have written this into his book. If the British public really can't wake up as to what is being done to them....