George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four now has a trigger warning

Of all things 1984-ish, this story about Nineteen Eighty-Four itself might be the most 1984 in the history of anything.

Image from the motion picture Nineteen Eighty-Four

Out of all the books that have ever been published, George Orwell's novel Nineteen Eighty-Four (I prefer to spell it out like that when referring to the book or movie instead of shortening it to its numerical equivalent) is the one screaming most against attaching an advisory before reading.  It doesn't need anything so ridiculous.  Nineteen Eighty-Four speaks for itself, from the first sentence on through the final four words.

I wonder if people like Dolen Perkins-Valdez have ever bothered to try to understand what Orwell was conveying, what his underlying message was, when he first wrote his classic novel about totalitarianism and absolute control of the human spirit.  Perkins-Valdez is the one who has composed a new foreward to Nineteen Eighty-Four.  Which ordinarily isn't something too unprecedented.  There is a foreward by Walter Cronkite in the thirty-fifth anniversary edition of the book and I am sure there have been others.  But I could readily accept that Cronkite at least had sincerest appreciation for the novel.

The same cannot be said for Perkins-Valdez, whose foreward is actually a "trigger warning" of the kind slapped upon all works that fringe leftists declare to be "problematic".  After all this time, since Nineteen Eighty-Four's first publication in 1949, it has finally been revealed that Orwell''s book is misogynist and not sensitive enough to racial issues.  Perkins-Valdez, like too many others, demands that this most classic of warnings about absolute government must be perceived through the lens of those obsessed with identity politics.  "A sliver of connection can be difficult for someone like me to find in a novel that does not speak much to race and ethnicity," she writes.

These people just don't get it, do they?

I first read Nineteen Eighty-Four during spring break of my senior year of high school, while recovering from a second-degree burn inflicted during a part-time job.  That book completely absorbed me far and away from any pain I might have otherwise been feeling.  I had just recently finished reading Stephen King's The Stand.  Nineteen Eighty-Four was even more of a horror novel.  It wasn't altogether beyond the imagination that a realm like Oceania really could come about.  It was about language: the alteration and mutating and ultimately obliteration of words and the ability to verbalize an idea.  The destruction of language was an act of obscenity, one that tyrants and regimes and entire nations of their supplicants had perpetrated since time immemorial.  Our own times have proven to be no more invulnerable.

The destruction of thought.  That was the greatest crime that Nineteen Eighty-Four described.

And that is the crime that Dolen Perkins-Valdez and too many who describe themselves as "liberal-inclined" are guilty of not only aiding and abetting, but thoroughly advocating.  They are attempting to take apart books like Nineteen Eighty-Four and indict against them with the very same tools that the books utilize in their admonishments about totalitarian thought.

These people have never had any real jobs, I am sure of it.  They sit in their ivory towers and think themselves masters of all that they survey.  Putting a trigger warning on Nineteen Eighty-Four is how they justify their notion of having a "real" career that in the end does nothing to serve anything but their own egos.

As for what Perkins-Valdez is claiming, I've always thought that Nineteen Eighty-Four already addresses the racial issue.  Oceania, and its adversaries Eastasaia and Eurasia, are multi-ethnic states.  But that isn't a distinguishing factor in those nations' demographics.  The three super-states of Nineteen Eighty-Four have no "ethnicities" at all.  Why should they?  Each of them has de-humanized the lives of their individuals to such a degree that things like "race" are absolutely meaningless elements.  Yes, there are black people in Nineteen Eighty-Four's world.  For all we know Syme, the much-too-smart-for-his-own-good colleague of Winston's at the Ministry of Truth, is a "black person".  We don't know.  We simply aren't told.  It doesn't matter.  One day Syme is there and the next day he is not: just another "unperson" vaporized by the Party as if he had never existed at all.

Any person who thinks Nineteen Eighty-Four, or The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn or To Kill A Mockingbird has to pass the muster of leftist racial sensibilities before they can be experienced by the reader, is himself or herself attempting to destroy a thing.  In the end works such as these are the product of their respective authors, above and beyond the demands of modern ideology.  Indeed, if there is any book that preaches against the fruits of such ideology, it is Nineteen Eighty-Four.  It is a warning that we would do well to heed.

I close this essay with something very special to me.  It's the copy of Nineteen Eighty-Four that I bought in the spring of 1992.  I have kept it all this time, in remarkably excellent condition.  I take good care of the books that mean most to me.  I try to read Nineteen Eighty-Four every few years, along with Fahrenheit 451 and Atlas Shrugged.  Maybe that will suffice as a peak into the mind of this writer.