Sandra Newman, Author at 快猫短视频 Science news and science articles from 快猫短视频 Mon, 13 Nov 2023 12:32:47 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=7.0.1 242057827 Read an extract from Julia by Sandra Newman /article/2402559-read-an-extract-from-julia-by-sandra-newman/?utm_campaign=RSS|NSNS&utm_content=currents&utm_medium=RSS&utm_source=NSNS Mon, 13 Nov 2023 11:00:52 +0000 /?post_type=article&p=2402559
Suzanna Hamilton as Julia in the 1984 adaptation
Alamy Stock Photo

Fiction, along with a dozen other departments, had its Hate in Records. Records had the space; half the office had been cleared out in the Small Adjustment of 鈥79. It also made a nice break for Fiction, because they worked in the lightless depths, while Records was on Floor Ten, with banks of windows on all four walls. The catch was that they weren鈥檛 to use lifts 鈥 healthy exercise, comrades! To add insult to injury, there were three 鈥済host鈥 floors, which had once contained bustling offices but now stood empty, so Floor Ten was really Floor Thirteen. This meant not only three extra flights, but that you had to pass those floors-of-the-dead.

Every landing on the stairs was dominated by a telescreen. Syme and Ampleforth, who struggled with the climb, kept pausing to comment in apparent fascination on whatever the telescreen was saying, while panting and mopping the sweat from their brows. Julia had a habit of smiling at each telescreen as she passed, imagining some bored man in surveillance being cheered by her appearance. Stairs held no terrors for her. At twenty-six, she鈥檇 never been stronger, and certainly never so well fed. Today she was especially lively after the long, dull hours of idleness, and trotted up, chattering with everyone she met, pressing hands and laughing at jokes. Syme鈥檚 name for her was 鈥淟ove-Me鈥, which sometimes gave her pause, but could have been far worse. Only at the end did she slow abruptly, when she saw she might overtake O鈥橞rien. As a result, she was right on his heels when the group came pouring into Records.

The first thing she saw was Smith 鈥 Old Misery. He was moving chairs into rows, and, absorbed in this chore, looked surprisingly likeable. A lean man of roughly forty, very fair and grey-eyed, he resembled the man from the poster 鈥淗onour Our Intellectual Labourers鈥, though of course without the telescope. He appeared to be dreaming of something cold but fine. Perhaps he was thinking of music. He moved with obvious pleasure, despite his slight limp; you could see he liked to have physical purpose.

But then he noticed Julia, and his mouth thinned with revulsion. It was startling how it changed him: hawk to reptile. Julia thought: 鈥淣othing wrong with you a good shag wouldn鈥檛 fix!鈥 This almost made her laugh, for of course it was true. His real trouble wasn鈥檛 that his parents had been unpersons, or that he couldn鈥檛 keep up with Party doctrine, or even his nasty cough. Old Misery had a bad case of Sex Gone Sour. And naturally the woman was to blame. Who else?

Without giving it much thought, when Smith sat down, Julia went to sit directly behind him. She justified it to herself because it was the seat right by the windows. But when he stiffened, uncomfortable with her presence, she was meanly pleased. Beside her was a low bookshelf with only one book: an old Newspeak dictionary from 1981, now lightly rimed with dust. She imagined running her finger through the dust and writing on his nape with the dirt 鈥 perhaps a J for Julia 鈥 though of course she never would.

The only trouble was, from here, she could smell him. By all rights, he ought to smell like mildew, but he smelled like good male sweat. Then she noticed his hair, which was thick and fine and might be quite nice to touch. So unfair that the Party warped the good-looking ones. Let them take the Ampleforths and Symes, and leave the Smiths to her.

Then, wouldn鈥檛 you know, Margaret came to sit next to Smith, and O鈥橞rien followed after and sat on Margaret鈥檚 other side. Margaret and Smith ignored each other. All the Records people were like that. It was a treacherous job, reading oldthink all day, and Records workers kept each other at arm鈥檚 length. But what troubled Julia now was the question of why O鈥橞rien was tagging after Margaret. Surely he couldn鈥檛 enjoy plain Margaret simpering and sighing at him?

Julia looked away 鈥 always the safest option when anyone was doing something peculiar 鈥 and gazed out of the bank of windows. At that moment, a scrap of newspaper sailed past, hectically spinning in the air, before it abruptly spread itself and dived to the rooftops far below. From this height, you couldn鈥檛 tell prole neighbourhoods from Party neighbourhoods; that was always queer. It also took a moment to pick out the gaps where bombs had fallen; on the street, they were all around you, and London sometimes seemed more crater than city. There was a private-use fuel ban for daylight hours, and you could make out the rare wisps of smoke where the A1 dining centres were. Electricity cuts were in force as well, and the grubby, unlit windows of office buildings had the gloomy radiance of the sea.

A little chunk of the view was obstructed by the massive telescreen on the nearby Transport building, whose moving pictures created the illusion that the daylight kept flickering and subtly changing. The images repeated on a simple loop. First one saw a group of pink-cheeked children innocently playing in a playground. On the horizon, a shadowy group of perverts and Eurasians and capitalists grew, reaching towards the children with brutish hands. Then a cut-out of Big Brother rose and blotted the villains out, and a slogan appeared in the sky: THANK YOU, BIG BROTHER, FOR OUR SAFE CHILDHOOD! After this, the same children reappeared, now in the uniform of the children鈥檚 organization, the Spies: grey shorts, blue shirt and red kerchief. The jolly Spies marched past with an Ingsoc flag, and the slogan in the sky became: join the spies! Then all faded, and the first image returned.

Weaving busily above this scene were helicopters. First you noticed the large ones, whose passage was audible even behind thick windows. These were manned by a pilot and two gunners, and you sometimes saw a gunner sitting casually in the open door of a copter with his black rifle resting against his knee. Once you thought of copters, you started noticing the flocks of microcopters below; then the big ones looked like the little ones鈥 parents. The micros weren鈥檛 manned but operated by remote control. They were only for surveillance, and in Outer Party districts, you鈥檇 often glance up from a task to find a micro hovering by your window like a nosy bird.

But by far the most striking thing in the view was the Ministry of Love. It rose from the jumble of ruins and low houses like a white fin breaching turbid brown water. On its gleaming surface, you could make out the tiny figures of workmen, attached to a slender tracery of cables, scrubbing its eerily snow-white flank. Apart from the tiny detail of those workmen, the building was so white it gave the impression of being an absence: a portal to nothingness cut through the shabby city and the cloudy sky. Love had no windows at all, giving its austere beauty a suffocating effect. Julia had heard a story that the mice there had no eyes; with no light, they had no need. That was bollocks, of course. Even when there was a power cut, the four big Ministries always had electric light. Still, those mythic blind mice troubled her. They stood for the real terrors behind those walls, terrors one couldn鈥檛 see and must imagine in ignorance.

by Sandra Newman (Granta) is the latest pick for the 快猫短视频 Book Club. Sign up and read along with us聽here

]]>
2402559
鈥業t felt detoxifying鈥: Retelling 1984 from a female perspective /article/2402407-it-felt-detoxifying-retelling-1984-from-a-female-perspective/?utm_campaign=RSS|NSNS&utm_content=currents&utm_medium=RSS&utm_source=NSNS Mon, 13 Nov 2023 11:00:08 +0000 /?post_type=article&p=2402407
George Orwell broadcasting on the BBC in London in 1943.
Alamy Stock Photo
Almost since its publication, people have been saying George Orwell鈥檚 1984 is 鈥渕ore relevant now than ever鈥. In one respect, though, it hasn鈥檛 aged well. This is in its treatment of women, and particularly the character Julia, the lover of the protagonist Winston Smith. Like many female characters in 20th-century novels, Julia feels like a projection of male fantasy. First, there is no clear explanation for her infatuation with Winston: a puny, timid man with skin ulcers and varicose veins, whose conversation sends her to sleep. In her perpetual cheerfulness and sexual availability, her patience with Winston鈥檚 occasional impotence and constant self-absorption, her eagerness to introduce him to the few joys still available in Airstrip One, without ever seeming to notice that all she gets back is negativity, she feels like a mythic creature invented to soothe the egos of insecure men. What makes her truly disturbing, though, is the degree to which she is a focus of misogyny. Before they鈥檝e ever spoken to each other, Winston hates Julia purely because she is hot but unavailable. In the Two Minutes Hate, it is towards Julia he directs his hatred: 鈥淗e would flog her to death with a rubber truncheon. He would tie her naked to a stake and shoot her full of arrows like Saint Sebastian. He would ravish her and cut her throat at the moment of climax.鈥 Later, when he suspects her of spying on him, he considers not only bashing in her brains, but raping her first. After their affair begins, he is filled yet again with the desire to murder her when she once says she can鈥檛 meet for sex. This might just be Winston鈥檚 character; we鈥檙e told he 鈥渄isliked nearly all women鈥. Perhaps Orwell鈥檚 prescience extended to the invention of the incel? But Julia shares Winston鈥檚 dislike. She comments about the women鈥檚 hostel where she lives: 鈥淎lways in the stink of women! How I hate women!鈥 When Winston tells her about a time when he was walking beside a cliff with his wife, and had a passing thought of pushing her off, Julia blithely says: 鈥淲hy didn鈥檛 you give her a good shove? I would have.鈥 Though all the crimes in the book are committed by men, there is no similar homicidal yearning towards a man. At 20, I found it profoundly demoralising to read all this, especially since I鈥檇 just been tearing through all of Orwell鈥檚 political non-fiction and finding my own ideas sometimes confirmed and sometimes demolished by his marvellous clarity. I was most of all impressed by his ability to see through the distortions of privilege to comprehend the full humanity of the poorest people in society. But even for Orwell, it turned out, some animals were more equal than others. In setting out to write a novel from the point of view of Julia, I was partly hoping to heal this gap 鈥 to expand Orwell鈥檚 world into one in which women, too, had full humanity, where they weren鈥檛 just projections of male desires, but people with desires of their own. I initially worried that Orwell鈥檚 text would be an obstacle to this. But I found that Julia does feel real, almost startlingly real in some scenes. Or she does if you throw away Winston鈥檚 assumption that she鈥檚 being completely honest with him. Does she really hate all of the women at her hostel for being women, or does she just know this line is likely to impress a man like Winston Smith? Is she really disappointed with Winston for not killing his wife, or is she probing to find out how serious his desire to murder women is? At 26, she鈥檚 had scores of previous lovers, yet she introduces herself to Winston with an 鈥淚 love you鈥 note. He swallows this hook, line and sinker 鈥 but is she really so head-over-heels with this stranger who will be her 50th or 100th lover? Is she even faithful to him? Seen this way, Julia becomes both more believable and more interesting. It was also fun to follow her to the places Winston never goes and Orwell barely mentions: to meetings at the Junior Anti-Sex League, to her dealings on the black market, to trysts with her other lovers and to her old job at Pornosec, where pornographic novels are written for proles. The work soon absorbed me completely. It also felt detoxifying. I never felt as if I was rebuking Orwell, much less correcting him. It was more like an intimate conversation, sometimes agreeing, sometimes disagreeing, where I was able to say to him everything I鈥檇 always wanted to say. And perhaps, I sometimes thought, the disagreement was smaller than it appeared. Perhaps the book鈥檚 misogyny was an attempt to explore the problem, to understand it and transcend it? Perhaps Orwell saw how he鈥檇 shortchanged Julia, but had been taught that women鈥檚 real experience had no place in serious fiction? Perhaps her inconsistencies were evidence he鈥檇 begun to chafe at this? This is probably fantasy, the fantasy of someone who isn鈥檛 ready to let go of Orwell, but can鈥檛 make her peace with certain things he wrote. But after two years of working with Orwell鈥檚 depiction of Julia, I feel a certain level of comfort in projecting my fantasy back on him. by Sandra Newman (Granta) is the latest pick for the 快猫短视频 Book Club. Sign up and read along with us聽here]]>
2402407