Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: O+l?

  1. #1
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    4

    O+l?

    Does the oranges and lemons poem have any significant meaning? Other than when the thought police catch you, you wont make it out alive.

  2. #2
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4
    I think the poem shows the effectiveness of the memory hole, the way the past has been more or less eliminated. There seems to be no real shared memory anymore, even of something so simple as a nursery rhyme. It is only pieced together through the collective efforts of Winston, Julia, Charrington, and (if I remember right) O'Brien.

    Even then, there is another line to the poem which is not mentioned in the book. The final verse is often: Here comes a candle to light you to bed. Here comes a chopper to chop off your head. Chip, chip, chop, chop the last man's dead.

    Given Orwell's original title: The Last Man In Europe, I think this has some significance. First, that all the characters together don't manage to complete the poem. Second, of course, that the "last man" will, in fact, be dead. Perhaps Winston truly is the last man, as we define it, in Europe?

    Hope this helps.

  3. #3
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1
    Sex, Violence and Concrete: The Post-war Dystopian Vision
    of London in Nineteen Eighty-Four


    by : LAWRENCE PHILLIPS

    "The emergence of the nursery rhyme ‘Oranges and Lemons’ as a
    significant motif in the novel attests to Orwell’s complex engagement
    with the materiality of the past. The significance of the rhyme is that
    it points to physical locales in the fabric of London and hints at a pre-
    Revolutionary usage and history. This is crucial since the Party, in
    line with its policy of rewriting the historical record and the
    complementary control of memory to suit its purposes, has also
    attempted to appropriate the material artefacts of the city’s history to
    their version of the past:

    "'Winston wondered vaguely to what century the church belonged. It was
    always difficult to determine the age of a London building. Anything
    large and impressive, if it was reasonably new in appearance, was
    automatically claimed as having been built since the Revolution, while
    anything that was obviously of an earlier date was ascribed to some dim
    period called the Middle Ages. The centuries of capitalism were held to
    have produced nothing of any value. One could not learn history from
    architecture any more than one could learn it from books. Statues,
    inscriptions, memorial stones, the names of streets – anything that might
    throw light upon the past had been systematically altered. (88)"'

    It is memory rather than history that presents this challenge and gains
    its power by its association with the material city."


    I realize the original post was made in 2009, but if this question is still relevant, this is a reputable source found via 'Academic Search Premier,' which is used by EBSCOhost.
    Last edited by Jsell; 03-18-2010 at 05:15 PM. Reason: Forgot to add quotes on the quoted paragraph.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •