What do you think?
Rate this book
1984
April, 1984. Winston Smith, thinks a thought, starts a diary, and falls in love. But Big Brother is watching him, and the door to Room 101 can swing open in the blink of an eye. Its ideas have become our ideas, and Orwell’s fiction is often said to be our reality. The definitive book of the 20th century is re-examined in a radical new adaptation exploring why Orwell’s vision of the future is as relevant as ever.
"This is a staging that reconsiders a classic with such steely power that it chills brain, blood and bone." - The Times
"[A] pitilessly brilliant retelling." - Guardian
"This risk-taking adaptation of George Orwell's masterpiece is doubleplusgood." - Telegraph
"A theatrical tour de force that has the destructive power of an earthquake." - The Stage
"Skilfully brought to life.... This is a very neat theatrical telling of the classic dystopian parable which is more a study of internal tension and tiny acts of defiance as it is a political drama... a work of extraordinary quality and intensity." - Independent
Eric Arthur Blair (25 June 1903 – 21 January 1950), better known by his pen name George Orwell, was an English novelist and journalist, whose most famous works include the novella Animal Farm, and the classic dystopia 1984.
Duncan Macmillan is an award-winning writer and director. Plays include: Lungs (Paines Plough/Sheffield Crucible and Studio Theatre Washington D.C.), Platform (Old Vic Tunnels), Monster (Royal Exchange/Manchester International Festival), The Most Humane Way to Kill A Lobster (Theatre 503), I Wish To Apologise For My Part In The Apocalypse, So Say All of Us and Family Tree (all BBC Radio 4).
Robert Icke was artistic director of the Arden Theatre Company in Stockton-on-Tees from 2003–7 and of the Swan Theatre Company in Cambridge from 2005–8, where he was awarded the Susie Gautier-Smith Prize for his contribution to theatre.
"This is a staging that reconsiders a classic with such steely power that it chills brain, blood and bone." - The Times
"[A] pitilessly brilliant retelling." - Guardian
"This risk-taking adaptation of George Orwell's masterpiece is doubleplusgood." - Telegraph
"A theatrical tour de force that has the destructive power of an earthquake." - The Stage
"Skilfully brought to life.... This is a very neat theatrical telling of the classic dystopian parable which is more a study of internal tension and tiny acts of defiance as it is a political drama... a work of extraordinary quality and intensity." - Independent
Eric Arthur Blair (25 June 1903 – 21 January 1950), better known by his pen name George Orwell, was an English novelist and journalist, whose most famous works include the novella Animal Farm, and the classic dystopia 1984.
Duncan Macmillan is an award-winning writer and director. Plays include: Lungs (Paines Plough/Sheffield Crucible and Studio Theatre Washington D.C.), Platform (Old Vic Tunnels), Monster (Royal Exchange/Manchester International Festival), The Most Humane Way to Kill A Lobster (Theatre 503), I Wish To Apologise For My Part In The Apocalypse, So Say All of Us and Family Tree (all BBC Radio 4).
Robert Icke was artistic director of the Arden Theatre Company in Stockton-on-Tees from 2003–7 and of the Swan Theatre Company in Cambridge from 2005–8, where he was awarded the Susie Gautier-Smith Prize for his contribution to theatre.
96 pages, Paperback
Published September 2, 2014
353 people are currently reading
1192 people want to read
About the author
Duncan Macmillan
61 books67 followersThis page is for the English playwright. For the Scottish art historian, see Duncan Macmillan.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 74 reviews
October 16, 2023
While I've admired the previous work of both the theatrical adapters of Orwell's dystopian novel, I was less enchanted with this offering. Partially, this is due to the fact that the staging relies heavily on audio and visual flourishes that one can't get through the medium of reading the script. But also, the framing device of having the entire story discussed by a futuristic 2050 book group (as suggested by Orwell's often skipped appendix to the novel) ... doesn't really work and is highly confusing. There were reports that patrons fainted and or vomited while watching the show (presumably during Winston's torture with the 'rat mask'), so apparently this was highly effective theatre - but the script is such, I'd rather just read the original.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/22/th...
https://www.theguardian.com/stage/201...
https://www.theguardian.com/stage/201...
https://www.theguardian.com/stage/201...
https://www.theguardian.com/books/201...
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/22/th...
https://www.theguardian.com/stage/201...
https://www.theguardian.com/stage/201...
https://www.theguardian.com/stage/201...
https://www.theguardian.com/books/201...
March 6, 2018
Re-read after almost a decade. The surreality has manifested into reality and nothing reads strange now. But then of course, no one writes like Orwell did.
August 24, 2014
Superb adaptation of one of my favorite novels. I love the way the scenes from the novel are moved around chronologically and juxtaposed differently, to give the feeling that Winston's days are interchangeable, like Groundhog Day. And then after he and Julia are caught, the storytelling shifts abruptly to linear, with the dialogue between Winston and O'Brien distilled down to its essence. Powerful telling of this story.
May 20, 2017
I'm usually touch and go on Headlong shows, but the style suits this work perfectly. A chilling adaptation, any problems I have are with the original story not this stellar version of it. Suitably alienating.
August 22, 2018
Brutal and unrelenting from beginning to end. The adapters have made nuanced choices to bring the story into the 21st century and to implicate the audience in the proceedings. Big Brother and the party have always existed. We on the other hand...
February 26, 2017
Reading for the State Theatre Company of SA production and now chilled to the bone. If it was relevant for the times 5 years ago when it was adapted, then it feels even more so now.
November 25, 2020
by far my favorite play i've ever read. wildly chilling and excellently written
November 15, 2021
ιитєяєѕтιиg αи∂ νєяу ∂ιffєяєит
February 14, 2021
(For the play)
Ew.
Ew.
February 15, 2021
Great book. NOT to be used as instructions .
June 22, 2024
Initially, I had chosen to read this novel, partly because I wanted to fully understand it before going to DP, because I’m currently a Y10 and just wanted to get it over with, so to say. about 20 pages in I realised I was an idiot and had picked up an adaptation of 1984 and not the actual book. I continued reading anyways and it was quite interesting to get a preview of the actual novel themes, and even more so interesting that it connects to what is commonly discussed in IBDP English. Like does 2 + 2 = 5? answer, no. the universal mathematical system is just a medium to demonstrate an elementary idea, if that makes sense. and it just so happens that O’Brien enjoys the sight of blood.
it was also interesting to read the book because we also did a theatre unit about Master Harold in semester 1, and to see how stage directions are conveyed in another novel so yea.
it was also interesting to read the book because we also did a theatre unit about Master Harold in semester 1, and to see how stage directions are conveyed in another novel so yea.
December 5, 2023
le pongo cuatro estrellas porque el concepto del mundo se me hace super loco, la construcción de la sociedad está muy bien pensada y cada cambio que se da a partir del dominio del gran hermano tiene una metodología muy lógica (el doble pensar es 😦😦😦). El final era algo que se esperaba y que desde el principio Winston es consciente, pero aún así sorprende leerlo, punto a favor para mí.
Me demoré en leerlo pero se disfrutó
Me demoré en leerlo pero se disfrutó
December 23, 2017
“I think we’ve ended up being incredibly faithful to the book.” Duncan MacMillan
George Orwell’s last novel, published in 1949, was not expected to have much of a shelf life post-1984 but the book has assumed an unexpected importance in contemporary times as citizens struggle to understand the machinations of politics, especially mass surveillance, ceaseless war, state-sponsored torture and how language is degraded for propaganda purposes in a globally-connected world.
Nineteen Eighty-Four continues to appear in the bestseller lists. ‘Orwellian’ is frequently used in newspaper articles and editorials along with the terms coined in the novel: Big Brother, Newspeak, Room 101, Doublethink and Thought Police. There is a new edition of the novel, ongoing scholarly interest in Orwell’s extensive output of non fiction writing, including his journalism, reviews and essays. There is ongoing debate about his political beliefs and the textual integrity of his work, often treated unkindly by editors fearing legal action.
Dennis Glover has cheered us a little with his forward to the latest edition of Nineteen Eighty-Four by arguing that Orwell did not intend for the novel to conclude so bleakly. He shows us that the second printing of the first edition has Winston displaying free will and not scribbling “5” in response to the question, 2+2 = when sitting alone at the The Chestnut Tree Cafe. He believes it likely Orwell requested this change in the last months of his life. Glover’s own novel, The Last Man in Europe, imaginatively explores Orwell’s path to writing Nineteen Eighty-Four.
Tickets to the latest stage adaptation – created by Robert Icke & Duncan MacMillan, which has had phenomenal success in the last couple of years in the UK, USA and now Australia – were not easy to procure. Luckily, I saw the closing night of the Sydney Theatre Company’s sold-out run staged at the Roslyn Packer Theatre last week and have been reflecting on the show and reading the script.
The 100-minute performance, without interval, had an intensity undiminished throughout. The stagecraft, especially the use of multimedia, is remarkable for both its simplicity and sophistication. The media-hype about the torture scene, when Winston is in Room 101, unfortunately lessened the impact as it is not as confronting as expected. I was disappointed that there was not a multimedia technique to give Winston’s perspective of those famished sewer rats hurling their yellow-teethed and scaly bodies at the cage door to attack his face. That would have been truly more disturbing than blood on plastic.
The casting challenged my conception of the novel’s protagonist Winston, played by Tom Conroy, as he appeared far too youthful and vigorous. There was not an itchy varicose vein in sight. There was a great need for more thoughtful stillness and less melodramatic paranoia. Julia (Ursula Mills) also felt wrong and ineffectively wooden. O’Brien (Terence Crawford) was perfect, played with quiet menace and complete authority. The scenes inside the Ministry of Truth are the strongest in the play.
“Winston’s vantage point is 1984, or thereabouts, whereas the anonymous author of the postscript could be writing at any point up and beyond 2050, the moment Oldspeak was superseded by Newspeak. The appendix yields fascinations about a totalitarian state’s control of language – and by extension thought.” (quoted from STC program)
Most conversation, online and after the show, amongst English teacher colleagues and friends, focused on the framing device that commenced and concluded the play. Many felt it was disorienting and poorly staged. A book club appear to be discussing the novel from a vantage point in the future and Winston is present. It becomes more obvious what is going on by the (much more effective) epilogue. Robert Icke explains the central importance of the often unread appendix, The Principles of Newspeak, to faithfully adapting the novel:
“I think the appendix is the most important bit. I think it is structurally the thing that defines the whole… I don’t know that you can adapt this novel if you don’t touch the appendix….It’s a book that’s about unreliability…and Orwell puts something at the end that a lot of people hilariously and ironically haven’t bothered to finish.”
The opening of the play doesn’t quite work. The intellectual foundation of the idea is spot on but the staging fails to realise the conceit. The set, with books/shelves, does not make complete sense, especially as we see the books throughout most of the play. Yes, the reading group were in a library-like setting but that then jars visually when we are in Winston’s room at Victory Mansions. The epilogue is more effective and reveals how Newspeak and thought control have been implemented by 2050. The thoughtful audience member has the opportunity to question authorship and the inherent challenge of truthfulness in language. It certainly resulted in doublethink for me. With a few tweaks to the opening scene, perhaps making use of multimedia, the present of Winston’s world of 1984 could be distinguished more effectively from that of the future and would help realise the philosophy espoused by those adapting the novel.
George Orwell’s last novel, published in 1949, was not expected to have much of a shelf life post-1984 but the book has assumed an unexpected importance in contemporary times as citizens struggle to understand the machinations of politics, especially mass surveillance, ceaseless war, state-sponsored torture and how language is degraded for propaganda purposes in a globally-connected world.
Nineteen Eighty-Four continues to appear in the bestseller lists. ‘Orwellian’ is frequently used in newspaper articles and editorials along with the terms coined in the novel: Big Brother, Newspeak, Room 101, Doublethink and Thought Police. There is a new edition of the novel, ongoing scholarly interest in Orwell’s extensive output of non fiction writing, including his journalism, reviews and essays. There is ongoing debate about his political beliefs and the textual integrity of his work, often treated unkindly by editors fearing legal action.
Dennis Glover has cheered us a little with his forward to the latest edition of Nineteen Eighty-Four by arguing that Orwell did not intend for the novel to conclude so bleakly. He shows us that the second printing of the first edition has Winston displaying free will and not scribbling “5” in response to the question, 2+2 = when sitting alone at the The Chestnut Tree Cafe. He believes it likely Orwell requested this change in the last months of his life. Glover’s own novel, The Last Man in Europe, imaginatively explores Orwell’s path to writing Nineteen Eighty-Four.
Tickets to the latest stage adaptation – created by Robert Icke & Duncan MacMillan, which has had phenomenal success in the last couple of years in the UK, USA and now Australia – were not easy to procure. Luckily, I saw the closing night of the Sydney Theatre Company’s sold-out run staged at the Roslyn Packer Theatre last week and have been reflecting on the show and reading the script.
The 100-minute performance, without interval, had an intensity undiminished throughout. The stagecraft, especially the use of multimedia, is remarkable for both its simplicity and sophistication. The media-hype about the torture scene, when Winston is in Room 101, unfortunately lessened the impact as it is not as confronting as expected. I was disappointed that there was not a multimedia technique to give Winston’s perspective of those famished sewer rats hurling their yellow-teethed and scaly bodies at the cage door to attack his face. That would have been truly more disturbing than blood on plastic.
The casting challenged my conception of the novel’s protagonist Winston, played by Tom Conroy, as he appeared far too youthful and vigorous. There was not an itchy varicose vein in sight. There was a great need for more thoughtful stillness and less melodramatic paranoia. Julia (Ursula Mills) also felt wrong and ineffectively wooden. O’Brien (Terence Crawford) was perfect, played with quiet menace and complete authority. The scenes inside the Ministry of Truth are the strongest in the play.
“Winston’s vantage point is 1984, or thereabouts, whereas the anonymous author of the postscript could be writing at any point up and beyond 2050, the moment Oldspeak was superseded by Newspeak. The appendix yields fascinations about a totalitarian state’s control of language – and by extension thought.” (quoted from STC program)
Most conversation, online and after the show, amongst English teacher colleagues and friends, focused on the framing device that commenced and concluded the play. Many felt it was disorienting and poorly staged. A book club appear to be discussing the novel from a vantage point in the future and Winston is present. It becomes more obvious what is going on by the (much more effective) epilogue. Robert Icke explains the central importance of the often unread appendix, The Principles of Newspeak, to faithfully adapting the novel:
“I think the appendix is the most important bit. I think it is structurally the thing that defines the whole… I don’t know that you can adapt this novel if you don’t touch the appendix….It’s a book that’s about unreliability…and Orwell puts something at the end that a lot of people hilariously and ironically haven’t bothered to finish.”
The opening of the play doesn’t quite work. The intellectual foundation of the idea is spot on but the staging fails to realise the conceit. The set, with books/shelves, does not make complete sense, especially as we see the books throughout most of the play. Yes, the reading group were in a library-like setting but that then jars visually when we are in Winston’s room at Victory Mansions. The epilogue is more effective and reveals how Newspeak and thought control have been implemented by 2050. The thoughtful audience member has the opportunity to question authorship and the inherent challenge of truthfulness in language. It certainly resulted in doublethink for me. With a few tweaks to the opening scene, perhaps making use of multimedia, the present of Winston’s world of 1984 could be distinguished more effectively from that of the future and would help realise the philosophy espoused by those adapting the novel.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
March 7, 2024
help what did I just read? I think I need to see this live to fully make it make sense but the parts I did follow were great! Would not have understood if I didn’t have knowledge of the original novel.
September 21, 2024
In regards to using this for High School, yesssssssss. Takes a classic book that would be sometimes hard for kids to understand and simplifies it. All the scenes are about the same length and would make a nice dialogue unit.
In regards to depth…. Eh. It’s very high school.
In regards to depth…. Eh. It’s very high school.
May 7, 2025
the forward puts suchhhh interesting ideas forward about the potential history implied by the appendix to 1984 but i didn't realize the play itself would not push that idea very far forward at all. but the forward is so good it almost makes up for it
May 27, 2023
more interesting than the novel
June 16, 2023
Had to read this for an interview and I am simply 🤯
October 21, 2023
An intimate exploration of the human experience, offering profound insights and reflections
May 4, 2024
Not as great as the book, and some brilliant koments removed, but it's 1984 so it still 19ATEy4
December 20, 2024
Muy buen libro, pero muy complicado de leer
March 13, 2025
Simplesmente, excelente!
June 25, 2025
4.5 stars bloody horrifying; would not recommend if you're already in a mental health slump
November 29, 2025
Hello Julia I’m Winston Smith
June 26, 2023
Jedna z najlepszych książek jakie czytałam w swoim życiu
Read
January 13, 2020OK so 1984 follows a man in a Socratic that follows everything that the party big brother has to say big brothers they could never be wrong and even if they are wrong than they will changed it even if there predictions are wrong and our boy Winston smith comes in he works at this basically news place that changes the paper if big brother is wrong and big brother have camres every where you look if you volatile the law in any point children are taught to talented tail and there fellow friends he also has a diary that he writes in that if big brother finds out he has it he could die for
later he falls in love with this girl named Julia at his work and he writes in his dairy about liking her and how this feelings are new and kinda weird at first but they fall in love and find this like shop thing that makes them feel like they have some sort of freedom from big brother but nope it was a trap and lm gonna leave it there and go read the book with is just a short sum up of the book go read it to get the full story anyway l liked the book l would remmond it to someone who like this kinds stuff would remmond to 8th and beckoned cause it deals with some stuff in anyway l liked it it was chill
later he falls in love with this girl named Julia at his work and he writes in his dairy about liking her and how this feelings are new and kinda weird at first but they fall in love and find this like shop thing that makes them feel like they have some sort of freedom from big brother but nope it was a trap and lm gonna leave it there and go read the book with is just a short sum up of the book go read it to get the full story anyway l liked the book l would remmond it to someone who like this kinds stuff would remmond to 8th and beckoned cause it deals with some stuff in anyway l liked it it was chill
October 2, 2014
George Orwell can captivate you from the first page. This tells the story of a man, Winston living in 1984, a world dominated by 'Big Brother' and the Party where you can't trust anybody, not even our wife or children. One can easily identify the way this society works from the motto mention in his diary: 'War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength' and the posters that say 'Big Brother is watching you'. Orwell manages to present in great details the torture to which our main character is subjected and what it really meant to be reeducated in order to fit in the world of Big Brother.
For all the history students out there this is a great book, along with 'Animal Farm', that will help you understand the way the fascism regimes works.
I highly recommend this book.
For all the history students out there this is a great book, along with 'Animal Farm', that will help you understand the way the fascism regimes works.
I highly recommend this book.
September 26, 2023
Is one of my favorite books, George Orwell actually made feel sad and frustated by the society he was picturing in the book and how everything resembles our society, specially since it was written in 1949, a lot of years ago and nothing seems to change.
The citizens in this book were so manipulated by the government, their lifes, their believes, their thoughts, everything was being observed and judged.
I felt a lot while reading this book!
The citizens in this book were so manipulated by the government, their lifes, their believes, their thoughts, everything was being observed and judged.
I felt a lot while reading this book!
March 7, 2018
I've read this play adaptation of 1984 twice in the last three months and I'll tell you a truth that applies to all good plays - it gets better when it is read aloud. I'm teaching a dystopian literature class and having my students read this play aloud - and take it seriously - brought so much more out of the text. Now I'm itching to direct it...
November 25, 2019
3/5
*Read for school*
“Until they become conscious they will never rebel, and until after they have rebelled they cannot become conscious.”
“Being in a minority, even in a minority of one, did not make you mad. There was truth and there was untruth, and if you clung to the truth even against the whole world, you were not mad.”
*Read for school*
“Until they become conscious they will never rebel, and until after they have rebelled they cannot become conscious.”
“Being in a minority, even in a minority of one, did not make you mad. There was truth and there was untruth, and if you clung to the truth even against the whole world, you were not mad.”
Displaying 1 - 30 of 74 reviews