Comparative Analysis Of V For Vendetta And 1984.docx

Hiya Goyal (568125) Thursday, April 12, 2018

Comparative Analysis of V for Vendetta and 1984 Although there are no doubt clear similarities among the dystopian societies portrayed in media, when the societies are based on extremities at opposite ends of the political spectrum, such as in the film V for Vendetta as opposed to George Orwell’s 1984, there is noticeable juxtaposition that can collectively express alarming themes about the society that one lives in. One such theme portrayed was the idea that rebellion was considered foolish in 1984 whereas it was considered bravery in V for Vendetta. When Winston chose to oppose Big Brother and the society that INGSOC had created, he was deemed a man rejecting the government by committing the treacherous THOUGHTCRIME. His treason lead to being dragged to the Ministry of Love’s Room 101, where he is beaten and tortured by O’Brien with him justifying it by saying, “I shall save you, I shall make you perfect,” (Orwell, 244); leading the reader to believe that his falling in love was a mistake and undesirable by anybody on Airstrip One. However, in V for Vendetta when V expresses to the people that “when injustice becomes law, rebellion becomes duty” (McTeigue 2005), he was able to open the eyes of the people to the flaws in the society, causing them to unionize in the end with Evey dubbing V a hero. His actions, despite being viewed as terrorism by the government, was proven to reflect the ideologies of the citizens also as they choose to carry V’s legacy. Moreover, when looking at Winston and V’s character in both media, they were both illustrated to be antihero’s that reject the norms of society and choose to follow a path that could end either fortunately or tragically; in spite of such, it can be noted that while V’s intentions were for the betterment of society, Winston’s desires were purely selfish, which places the former as vigilante and the latter as a fugitive. Before Winston was “vaporized” by the party, he was an enemy of both the people and the party as his choice to act upon his sexual desires did not benefit anybody but himself. In contrast, despite the murders that he had committed and the lives that he had arguably ruined, V was seen as a hero by both the people and Evey, whom he tortured. V’s antiheroic vigilantism was admired by the people yet hated by the party before and after the rebellion whereas Winston was told that he was hated by both before his conditioning to conform, thus why V was able to follow through with his plans of rebellion, despite his death, and Winston was left having to live the rest of his life loving only Big Brother and forgetting his past hatred. The most prominent distinction between 1984 and V for Vendetta would be the

societies, which are set on opposite ends of the political spectrum with 1984 being set in a communist world where the division of human relationships is desirable and V for Vendetta being in a fascist one, where V promoted the unity of people. In Room 101, O’Brien tells Winston that the Party desired to “cut the links between child and parent and between man and man, and between man and woman,” (Orwell, 336) so that in the end, the only alliance will be between a man and Big Brother. INGSOC functioned off the support and allegiance of the people and they feared that by placing another above on the pedestal, it would disrupt the hierarchy that had been enforced for many decades. V and Evey lived in a society that was heavily based off of Nazi Germany with the totalitarian tones and oppression being veiled by the widespread feelings of nationalism, which meant that in order to reverse such ideologies, V wanted to unionize the people through the broadcasting of antigovernment propaganda and a final blow to weaken the government to give the citizens a fighting chance amidst his death. The themes in both 1984 and V for Vendetta hyperbolize the flaws of modern society, they present what could have been if war could not be resolved and the innocent can be conditioned to believe that oppression is a normal way of life, but they also present the possible outcomes of rebellion in such a world.