(urth) "Realistic fiction leaves out too much." - Gene Wolfe

[James Wynn]

Actually, that was to Sergei.

On 5/6/2011 10:01 AM, James Wynn wrote:
> Mo,
>
> That's interesting observation. What specific ideas did you find 
> unconvincing? Have you seen the movie "The Lives of Others"?
>
> The only thing that *might* be unconvincing to me is that such a 
> society could be maintained _worldwide_ among three nations. But then, 
> I only know about the other two nations from what we are told. They 
> might actually be free. On the other hand, the belief in the eventual 
> inevitably universal spread of Soviet Socialism was not uncommon in 
> the UK in 1947 (much as the current belief in Liberal Democracy). So, 
> maybe Orwell was speculating "What if it _did_ happen?"
>
> J.
>
>
>> At 19:01 05/05/2011, Sergei wrote:
>>> By the way, I didn't like much the Orvell's "1984" (I did like
>>> the Animal Farm). The reason - "Animal Farm" is presented as abstract,
>>> symbolic fiction, and it seems almost perfect symbol.
>>> The "1984" contains many details that were not convincing,
>>> even as a possible development of the society in the USSR.
>>> It was still very good
>>> as a scheme, on the level of abstract ideas (language in "1984",
>>> inner Party, etc), but not in realistic details.
>>
>>
>> I