Power and Religion: 1984 and Big Brother

Throughout human history man has been trying to solve questions beyond his capabilities in a search for reason and understanding. Questions that have ranged from the cosmos to the smallest form of life, we have tried to find a reason for everything. Before any set boundaries of beliefs man found solace in believing in what he understood around him. Whether it is praying to a fire god for allowing flames or believing that an invisible force controlled the effects of the ocean man has tried to come up with ways to control and be at the helm of knowing. Once modern religion entered the picture and several texts pertaining to one single force as the essence of creation than man went down a road that forever changed culture, language, and even control over others. Every society that adopted monotheistic religion had to obey to a set of rules that would ensure stability within the religion and the society. However, there was no tangible object or being that could physically control the people. People put their faith into religious leaders and institutions that have a direct link with “God” and therefore had to behave accordingly. Due to the public’s commitment to their religion people had to fall in line with their beliefs as if an invisible eye was looking over them. The invisible eye, presumably God, is related to the idea of the panopticon and Michel Foucault’s theory. One of the best examples of the invisible force watching the rest of a society is seen in George Orwell’s dystopian film 1984. It is the idea that people can be rehabilitated from their bad deeds by thinking someone else is watching them; therefore they cannot perform any wrongdoings. Michel Foucault’s idea of the panopticon can be seen in direct relation with the ideas of religion, in that control is achieved through the belief of a higher surveillance constantly keeping people in check, and in turn reflecting on their beliefs in government as well, which was what Orwell was trying to display in his film 1984.
In Foucault's Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison, he outlines how the panopticon essentially deconstructs the human body and mind into becoming submissive to the rules and commands of those in power (in this sense, God). In his chapter on corrective training he cites, "In discipline, punishment is only one element of a double system: gratification-punishment. And it is this system that operates in the process of training and correction"(Foucault 180). This is similar to the punishment and reward system of religion. In many faiths and beliefs one who does well by the standard of the system will receive the prospects of a good life and the potential of reaching a higher state of being. On the contrary, one who disobeys religion and chooses a life of sin is destined to a life of hardship and punishment down the road. Foucault's system of reward and punishment is identical to religion and it's use of correcting and disciplining.
Even Foucault, in his chapter on docile bodies makes a direct reference to his theory and to religion. He describes a setting of a classroom and the use of a signal in which the children are supposed to react to. "Whenever a good pupil hears the noise of the signal, he will imagine that he is hearing the voice of the teacher or rather the voice of God himself calling him by his name...the pupil will have to have learnt the code of the signals and respond automatically to them" (Foucault 166). The signal that the students react to can be attributed to sin, or for not as strong a word, something out of the ordinary. The reaction by the students is similar to the reaction of something seeing something out of the ordinary and perhaps against the proper set of protocol. In short, Foucault proves that there are automated responses taught to us when something occurs. Through religion these responses occur to signals such as to the deadly sins or anyone with a separate faith.
This also correlates with madness and medicine, another area that Foucault researched. Due to the influence of religion in western culture many of our medicinal drugs and explanations for psychological or physical problems originate from religion. In a study of Foucault and Religion Jeremy R. Carrette goes on to say, “Religion forms part of the cultural residual which shapes and determines how madness and medicine have been shaped in the West. We may note, for example, how religion in the history of madness was seen as one of the ‘safeguards’ of reason and how religion in the establishment of moral treatment represented ‘what cannot go mad’”(Carrette 14). This quote shows the power of religion in relation to the world of pharmaceuticals. Now, because of the growth of science, medicine has changed many of the ways we go about healing ourselves. Carrette suggests how prior to medicine now religion was the final word on madness and the primary reason for healing. For example, the religious healing of the “exorcism” can be dissected in many ways. Because there was no explanation for some of the symptoms or causes for certain diseases, a priest was brought into many homes to perform an exorcism to get rid of demons. Because the patient believed it to be true, as did the performers, religion shaped the way healing and medicine was performed for a long time. This form of control, in relation to the panopticon, is another example of control through an outside force that cannot be seen or touched. Similar to an inmate in prison hoping to be saved or healed from his sins, the prisoner travels through a similar road to redemption. The prisoner believes that he is infected by a demon or some corrupt being and then must perform his own personal exorcism to be fully healed. The reason most inmates reach out to God more so whilst in prison than in the outside world directly correlates with religion and the idea of being spiritually healed in times of sickness. Religion has to power to strike fear and guilt into the hearts of many, and for prisoners this fear and guilt is only heightened. Jeremy R. Carrette finds this sense of salvation in Foucault’s study of Christianity and their beliefs by directly quoting Foucault, “’Christianity is not only a salvation religion, it’s a confessional religion…Each person has the duty …to try to know what is happening inside him, to acknowledge faults, to recognize temptations, to locate desires, and everyone is obliged to disclose these things either to God or to others in the community and hence to bear public or private witness against oneself’” (Carrete 27). This idea of an “invisible surveillance” is something that infiltrates our society today. By tying in religion and the panopticon many societies have incorporated a kind of silent watch over their citizens that cause individuals to be witness to themselves. Because of security, cameras, detectors, and other forms of surveillance, people walk around with a feeling of guilt and wrongdoing even though they themselves have no reason of feeling that way. The idea of being watched without completely knowing for certain first originated with religion, and through years of analysis of the panopticon has infiltrated itself into most modern societies.
Taking off of the idea that religion can control and has the power to control, it’s a good opportunity to look at 1984 and Orwell’s idea of Big Brother and it’s control over a society. The film presents a society being watched constantly by the government forcing each member to conform to the set of rules established by the higher force, something that is also prevalent in religion, propaganda. J.P O’Flinn of College English breaks down Orwell’s theory:
…whether the author admits it or not, every book has a “tendency,” religious, moral, or political, which it is part of the critic’s function to discern, and that even the contrary claim, namely that literature should have nothing to do with politics, is itself a political attitude (O’Flinn 608).

This fault, presented by the fact propaganda can be defined as anything that tries to suggest an idea onto others, creates turmoil for artists and authors to truly represent propaganda as a negative and possibly maniacal function. Orwell’s belief and O’Flinn’s theory spawns two separate forms of propaganda, positive and negative. Regardless of which is the right form, which would be impossible to discriminate against due to positive and negative can mean a number of things to different people, the forms at which propaganda is distributed remains relatively the same.
Sometimes words can be broken down in order to create less ways of interpretation or on the contrary words can be expanded in order to justify certain aspects that couldn’t be justified in the past. The same can be said for religion, which expands as well as reduces certain parts of itself in order to justify certain aspects. One example, which is prevalent in today’s society, is the idea of gay marriage. No where in any religious text is it written that the partnership of two men in marriage is forbidden, yet through interpretation of various clauses and passages that can be stretched and manipulated to mean a number of different ideas, religion justifies gay marriage as wrong and points to passages that supposedly connote their feelings. The same can be said about war. More people have been killed in the name of God then for any other reason, yet all religious materials preach peace and the love of one another. The contradictions found within the bible and its use of control is some of the many reasons their ideas are still used today.
George Orwell’s futuristic dystopian novel 1984 takes language to a new level known as Newspeak, a language broken down to bare minimalism with the display of propaganda is immense. Everywhere the title character (Winston) goes there are reminders of the oppression he is under. The tagline of “WAR IS PEACE/IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH/ FREEDOM IS SLAVERY” is written on every wall, beating into his head this belief. The tagline, which is used throughout the novel, is a reminder of the almost hypnotic repetition of certain words that help calm and subdue the masses, something that religion attempts to do as well. Many religious followers are not quiet about their faith and resort to plucking out their favorite words from their religious texts and displaying them for everyone to see, to slowly conform and change all those in their society. One example is the use of the words “Jesus Loves You” which is a strong Christian quote that is seen on bumper stickers, on banners, and on signs throughout religious neighborhoods. The words, similarly to the taglines from 1984, are used to get a message inside the heads of people within the community in order to believe and follow the same ideologies. Winston tries to better his situation by learning the truth but his thoughts are marred by O’Brien (i.e. Big Brother or Government) into eventually accepting the falsities that are told to him as true. Sociolinguists Pedro Louis Luchini and Adolfo Martin Garcia expand on the idea of words used in 1984 and had this to say:

…few were the governments around the world which have not tried to either gain or impose popular support by molding the masses’ language and cultural conventions through powerful speeches, constant propaganda and witty euphemisms. Although such sociolinguistic resources have proven immensely useful to rulers of all kinds, dictators and autocrats have capitalized on the aforementioned mechanisms like no one else. In fact, no tool has ever served the despotic ambitions of a totalitarian government as efficiently as lexical and semantic manipulation combined with an oppressive cultural environment (Luchini and Garcia 98).

Luchini and Garcia touch upon the theory that true governmental power comes from the governments ability to understand language and their ability to manipulate it, which again correlates with what religion aims to complete as well as the effects of the panopticon. With this combination of power and clever propaganda techniques societies can be lost within their “truths” for long periods of time. In the end religion and society will forever remain entwined, and the panopticon will continue to develop, yet religion will be a primary backing force. One note that wasn’t mentioned are the programs that are instilled within penal systems and within charity organizations. Many of them require that the inmate comply with some sort of religious practice in order to complete their rehabilitation within their time. For those that refuse to attend the religious services, their time could be extended or they will be punished for it. It’s a shame to think that religion has created such a stranglehold on human development, but unfortunately this has been something in effect for a very long time. When the connection between helping people and faith was connected this bond gained a very powerful position. Maybe in the future men can resort to helping one another through another means, such as love and for the sake of giving people a better life. Just because someone doesn’t believe in the stories of a particular religious text or believes in an overpowering source as the means of creation does not mean they cannot have morals and the opportunities for a successful and fulfilling life.


Works Cited

Carrette, Jeremy R. Foucault and Religion: Spiritual Corporality and Political Spirituality. New York: Routledge, 2002

Foucault, Michel. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. Great Britain: Penguin Books, 1977

O'Flinn, J.P. "Orwell on Literature and Society". College English, Vol. 31, No. 6. (Mar., 1970), pp. 603-612

Orwell, George. 1984. New York, NY: Signet Classic.1961.

Luchini, Pedro Luis and Garcia, Adolfo Martin. "Turning to Orwell To Understand Orwell's Problem: A Sociolinguistic View". The Reading Matrix. Vol. 6, No. 1. (Apr., 2006), pp. 97-98.