This can be harmful, because it means that the narrator doesn’t just ignore gender inequality, but actually perpetuates it.starts with a third person narrator introducing the main character, Winston Smith, and his world.Tags: Write Great College Entrance EssayPhd Thesis ServicesDrug Addiction Choice Or EssayWriting A Narrative PaperMfa Programs In Creative Writing OnlineEssay On Conservation Of Energy At HomeProcess Analysis In Essay WritingAncient Greek Art EssaysActuary Cover Letter Internship
Presumably — since he had sometimes seen her with oily hands and carrying a spanner — she had some mechanical job on one of the novel-writing-machines.
She was a bold-looking girl, of about twenty-seven, with thick dark hair, a freckled face and swift, athletic movements.
But still, the narrator makes it seem like Winston’s impressions of women are the truth.
And these impressions are misogynistic and two dimensional.
When he gets Julia’s ‘I love you’-note, he is solely concerned about losing her ‘white youthful body’ if he doesn’t reply (115), and later on he gets ‘violently angry’ when Julia is menstruating because he feels like she is cheating him out of something he doesn’t just want desperately, but actually ‘ha[s] a right to’ (145–6).
Curious to note here, too, as both Patai (Mystique 247) and Tirohl (58–9) have done, is that Julia and Winston apparently only meet up to have sex.Possibly even cheated out of a sense of masculinity that might come with having sex with a young woman like Julia.It seems that the only reason Winston wants ‘a woman of his own’ (71) is for her body, and the politics that come with it.And this view is never challenged by the only woman who doesn’t fit quite into this narrative: Julia might be different, she is still first and foremost defined as a female body. Eckstein argues this stems at least partly from his fear that she is a member of the Thought Police (49), and this is probably party true, certainly when Winston wants to kill Julia because she saw him in the proles quarter (105).However, before this he has already said: He hated her because she was young and pretty and sexless, because he wanted to go to bed with her and would never do so, because round her sweet supple waist, which seemed to ask to encircle it with your arm, there was only the odious scarlet sash, aggressive symbol of chastity.This leads to confusion, as Daphne Patai’s interpretation of this passage shows: ‘Orwell here dislodges the general comments about Party women so that they are no longer attached to Winston’s point of view but instead take on the form of reliable “facts”’ (Mystique 241), she writes.But in fact the narrator uses a textual style that simply factuality. unorthodoxy’) is surrounded by Winston’s subjectivity: ‘He disliked’, it says in the sentence before, and it is followed by ‘gave him the impression’.Although I do not agree with Patai’s continuous ‘blaming’ of the author himself, it is curious that a book criticizing power structures leaves power of men over women completely unquestioned.In this essay I will show how misogyny is subtly interwoven in the text of As the narrator often uses free indirect discourse (FID), it is made easy to read misogynistic descriptions as objective.(Orwell 17)It it thus undeniable that Winston started out hating Julia simply because he wanted to have sex with her.In knowing, or assuming, that that would never happens, Winston finds himself cheated out of something that he feels he ought to have.