What do you think?
Rate this book
Orwell: A Man of Our Time
A vivid portrait of the man behind the writings.
As one of the most enduringly popular and controversial novelists of the last century, the 70th anniversary of George Orwell's death in 2020 offers an opportunity to assess his relevance today.
Despite the commonplace view that Animal Farm was aimed exclusively at Stalinist Russia, it was far more broadly focused and the similarities between aspects of the novel and Trump's America are obvious. Not only the parallels with the current President, but also by those who feel that his cult of personality is a mandate for collective nastiness. "Doublethink" features in Nineteen Eighty Four and it is the forerunner to "Fake News."
Aside from Orwell's importance as a political theorist and novelist his life in its own right is a beguiling narrative. His family was caught between upper middle-class complacency and uncertainty, and Orwell's time at Prep School and as a scholarship boy at Eton caused him to despise the class system that spawned him despite finding himself unable to fully detach himself from it.
His life thereafter mirrored the history of his country; like many from his background he devoted himself to socialism as a salve to his conscience. He died at the point when Britain's status as an Imperial and world power had waned.
An interest in him endures, principally because it is difficult to differentiate between the man who recorded the terrible events of the depression and the Spanish Civil War as an observer and the fiction writer who used literature to predict grim possibilities and diagnose horribly endemic inclinations. No other British writer of the 20th century has blended ideas, political commentary and literary art in such a manner.
For an author whose work has been regarded as the most important in terms of the turbulent years of the mid-20th century and who eroded the boundaries between literature, journalism and political commentary, there have been relatively few attempts to present a vibrant portrait of the man behind the writings. Fifteen years (closer to eighteen when this book appears) is a long time for the absence of a life of one of one of the best-known authors of the twentieth century.
As one of the most enduringly popular and controversial novelists of the last century, the 70th anniversary of George Orwell's death in 2020 offers an opportunity to assess his relevance today.
Despite the commonplace view that Animal Farm was aimed exclusively at Stalinist Russia, it was far more broadly focused and the similarities between aspects of the novel and Trump's America are obvious. Not only the parallels with the current President, but also by those who feel that his cult of personality is a mandate for collective nastiness. "Doublethink" features in Nineteen Eighty Four and it is the forerunner to "Fake News."
Aside from Orwell's importance as a political theorist and novelist his life in its own right is a beguiling narrative. His family was caught between upper middle-class complacency and uncertainty, and Orwell's time at Prep School and as a scholarship boy at Eton caused him to despise the class system that spawned him despite finding himself unable to fully detach himself from it.
His life thereafter mirrored the history of his country; like many from his background he devoted himself to socialism as a salve to his conscience. He died at the point when Britain's status as an Imperial and world power had waned.
An interest in him endures, principally because it is difficult to differentiate between the man who recorded the terrible events of the depression and the Spanish Civil War as an observer and the fiction writer who used literature to predict grim possibilities and diagnose horribly endemic inclinations. No other British writer of the 20th century has blended ideas, political commentary and literary art in such a manner.
For an author whose work has been regarded as the most important in terms of the turbulent years of the mid-20th century and who eroded the boundaries between literature, journalism and political commentary, there have been relatively few attempts to present a vibrant portrait of the man behind the writings. Fifteen years (closer to eighteen when this book appears) is a long time for the absence of a life of one of one of the best-known authors of the twentieth century.
- GenresNonfictionBiography
304 pages, Hardcover
First published May 12, 2020
14 people are currently reading
191 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 27 of 27 reviews
February 15, 2020
Disagree with the author's politics quite a lot but it's an incredibly well-researched biography and his admiration of Orwell is infectious.
May 23, 2022
Excellently researched, but not always adequately cited. For fans of Orwell’s monolithic literary achievements Nineteen Eighty Four and Animal Farm, Bradford’s Orwell may seem to meander and not dwell sufficiently on those major works. However, fans of his entire catalogue will be at home and truly appreciate Bradford’s work, and the chapters will feel intuitive. As for research, its clear that Bradford has done his homework as far as covering Orwell’s work and reviewing the major biographies that have already sought to do him justice. For anyone already well read on Orwell, the conclusions often applied to him don’t necessarily make major leaps. Yes he was a relatively unconvincing socialist. Yes he was most likely antisemitic, and even his eventual condemnation of the Nazis hardly disproves or contradicts this: he always seemed more against the Nazis politically than morally, and just because he was against the wholesale law extermination of a certain people doesn’t mean he didn’t look down on and discriminate against them. Even advocating for increased emigration of European Jews to Great Britain doesn’t necessarily make him not an anti-semite. It wasn’t far off the position taken by Southern US aristocrats who imported African slaves to serve as the new bottom rung of their own oligarchic society and elevate working class whites and create a common cause with upper class whites there, first in the antebellum South and later under Jim Crow. Could importing large numbers of European Jews have served as a salve between the existing classes of England, strengthening the position of the working class? No one ever asked Orwell that point blank, so we’ll never know. But it doesn’t seem that far fetched. And Bradford certainly doesn’t let Orwell off the hook on this character flaw or on several others.
However, its on drawing the parallels with our own time that the textual and source evidence becomes scant. Not that the UK doesn’t have plenty of examples of antisemitism to draw from, but Bradford fails to make the point as well as he could by continuously mistaking anti-zionism with antisemitism. They’re not the same. Period. It may be true that most antisemites are likely antizionists, and therefore espouse such positions. But being antizionist doesn’t automatically make one an antisemite, and Bradford taking offense at what are essentially failed syllogisms more often acts to derail his arguments and the narrative than anything else. Most of the failure lies in the intentionally lazy analysis of the range of ‘antizionism.’ Obviously some extreme antizionists may believe, antisemitically of course, that the Jewish faith is unique among religions in not deserving a homeland, and that it follows that the country should be eliminated. But most antizionist positions, both in Orwell’s time and today, simply push the position that there is value in a separation of church and state (as is engrained in the US constitution and many other western nation’s laws), and therefore that no religion should be put above others in any country, and also that settlements of one group of people shouldn’t be expanded and built at the expense of groups already in a place. As such, its not even an anti-Israeli position as much as it is an antinationalist position. Just like opposing Donald Trump doesn’t make one anti-American, or being anti-Boris doesn’t make one an opponent of the UK, feeling that Benjamin Netanyahu’s particular brand of aggressive non-displomacy is counterproductive doesn’t make one anti-Israeli, let alone antisemitic. Bradford completely misses the boat on this one, and in doing so fails in making his case for this particular fight being one that Orwell initially carried the torch for.
As for Orwell and to an extent his colleague Jack Common being unique in producing working class literature, or breaking ground in doing so, the failure to mention Jack London seems significant, especially considering his major influence on Orwell. Its London’s experiences in ‘Tramping’ that put the but initially in Orwell’s mind, and reading Down and Out immediately after London’s The Road makes the influence uncanny. Dismissing Irvine Welsh’s Trainspotting as being more an upper and middle class portal into the working class, rather than being the authentic type of working class literature produced by and consumed by the working class isn’t entirely accurate either. The centrality of the written word in the media consumed by the masses (regardless of class distinction) had shifted seismically between Orwell’s 30’s and Welsch’s 90’s. Perhaps the lower classes in the 30’s were more likely to consumer dime novels than literary journalism like Down and Out, and Trainspotting, written in a vernacular style, is more similar to something produced by a literary scholar, like Kingsnorth’s The Wake, than it is to the 90’s equivalent of a dime novel. But Trainspotting was also adapted into a gritty indy film that subsequently became a cult classic, consumed by all classes, including the working class drug addict subculture it portrayed.
Of course, as Bradford points out, the ‘legitimacy’ of Orwell’s reportage in these various social justice themed works is hardly the point. Its that Orwell covered these topics at all, in a way that brought them to light and to the mainstream. Orwell may not have belonged to the classes he covered, or even been able to look upon them without disdain, but he did them justice by highlighting their plight. Referring to Orwell’s coverage of the northern England working class in Wigan Pier, Bradford asks “Is he disgruntled by the behavior of his native dispossessed?” As the narrator Kenji in Ryu Murakami’s In the Miso Soup would say, the native dispossessed were likely not all that gruntled themselves. But it was the situation they found themselves in, whether they liked it or not, and Orwell stuck himself there, in the working class Wigan soup, experiencing and writing about what was the normal bill of fare for these people for a readership that would never otherwise be remotely aware of it.
Bradford achieves his objective when he jumps on Orwell’s description of the English as “‘all too ready to listen to any journalist who tells them to trust their instincts and despise the “highbrow”.’ Substitute ‘experts’ for ‘highbrow,’” Bradford says, “and we are projected forward to post-Referendum Britain and the proclamations Michael Gove.” Substitute ‘Donald Trump’ for ‘Michael Gove’ and you’ve identified the illness in American politics, perhaps a more apt comparison to Orwell’s Britain: the world’s foremost power, an ostensible liberal democracy but one wracked by systemic inequalities, sitting on a precarious global throne, challenged from the doctrinal right and left. That was the British Empire in Orwell’s day, but it isn’t the UK today. It’s America.
All in all, this feels like more of a regurgitation of Orwell’s own content and analysis rather than a critical and new lense on Orwell himself or his work. Bradford even fails to make the nuanced criticism of modern pop culture that he readily observed Orwell making in the latter’s criticism of popular literature. His dismissal of David Bowie as ‘a drug-addicted, hedonistic rock star who had given little attention to recent history and literature’ is especially heavy handed, considering Bowie’s long shadow in today’s cultural zeitgeist and Bowie’s reputation for being culturally aware and concerned with justice (including racial justice, with Bowie’s criticism of MTV and their failure to play minority artists on air reminiscent of Orwell’s critique of British colonialism’s treatment of non-whites in the Empire.).
However, its on drawing the parallels with our own time that the textual and source evidence becomes scant. Not that the UK doesn’t have plenty of examples of antisemitism to draw from, but Bradford fails to make the point as well as he could by continuously mistaking anti-zionism with antisemitism. They’re not the same. Period. It may be true that most antisemites are likely antizionists, and therefore espouse such positions. But being antizionist doesn’t automatically make one an antisemite, and Bradford taking offense at what are essentially failed syllogisms more often acts to derail his arguments and the narrative than anything else. Most of the failure lies in the intentionally lazy analysis of the range of ‘antizionism.’ Obviously some extreme antizionists may believe, antisemitically of course, that the Jewish faith is unique among religions in not deserving a homeland, and that it follows that the country should be eliminated. But most antizionist positions, both in Orwell’s time and today, simply push the position that there is value in a separation of church and state (as is engrained in the US constitution and many other western nation’s laws), and therefore that no religion should be put above others in any country, and also that settlements of one group of people shouldn’t be expanded and built at the expense of groups already in a place. As such, its not even an anti-Israeli position as much as it is an antinationalist position. Just like opposing Donald Trump doesn’t make one anti-American, or being anti-Boris doesn’t make one an opponent of the UK, feeling that Benjamin Netanyahu’s particular brand of aggressive non-displomacy is counterproductive doesn’t make one anti-Israeli, let alone antisemitic. Bradford completely misses the boat on this one, and in doing so fails in making his case for this particular fight being one that Orwell initially carried the torch for.
As for Orwell and to an extent his colleague Jack Common being unique in producing working class literature, or breaking ground in doing so, the failure to mention Jack London seems significant, especially considering his major influence on Orwell. Its London’s experiences in ‘Tramping’ that put the but initially in Orwell’s mind, and reading Down and Out immediately after London’s The Road makes the influence uncanny. Dismissing Irvine Welsh’s Trainspotting as being more an upper and middle class portal into the working class, rather than being the authentic type of working class literature produced by and consumed by the working class isn’t entirely accurate either. The centrality of the written word in the media consumed by the masses (regardless of class distinction) had shifted seismically between Orwell’s 30’s and Welsch’s 90’s. Perhaps the lower classes in the 30’s were more likely to consumer dime novels than literary journalism like Down and Out, and Trainspotting, written in a vernacular style, is more similar to something produced by a literary scholar, like Kingsnorth’s The Wake, than it is to the 90’s equivalent of a dime novel. But Trainspotting was also adapted into a gritty indy film that subsequently became a cult classic, consumed by all classes, including the working class drug addict subculture it portrayed.
Of course, as Bradford points out, the ‘legitimacy’ of Orwell’s reportage in these various social justice themed works is hardly the point. Its that Orwell covered these topics at all, in a way that brought them to light and to the mainstream. Orwell may not have belonged to the classes he covered, or even been able to look upon them without disdain, but he did them justice by highlighting their plight. Referring to Orwell’s coverage of the northern England working class in Wigan Pier, Bradford asks “Is he disgruntled by the behavior of his native dispossessed?” As the narrator Kenji in Ryu Murakami’s In the Miso Soup would say, the native dispossessed were likely not all that gruntled themselves. But it was the situation they found themselves in, whether they liked it or not, and Orwell stuck himself there, in the working class Wigan soup, experiencing and writing about what was the normal bill of fare for these people for a readership that would never otherwise be remotely aware of it.
Bradford achieves his objective when he jumps on Orwell’s description of the English as “‘all too ready to listen to any journalist who tells them to trust their instincts and despise the “highbrow”.’ Substitute ‘experts’ for ‘highbrow,’” Bradford says, “and we are projected forward to post-Referendum Britain and the proclamations Michael Gove.” Substitute ‘Donald Trump’ for ‘Michael Gove’ and you’ve identified the illness in American politics, perhaps a more apt comparison to Orwell’s Britain: the world’s foremost power, an ostensible liberal democracy but one wracked by systemic inequalities, sitting on a precarious global throne, challenged from the doctrinal right and left. That was the British Empire in Orwell’s day, but it isn’t the UK today. It’s America.
All in all, this feels like more of a regurgitation of Orwell’s own content and analysis rather than a critical and new lense on Orwell himself or his work. Bradford even fails to make the nuanced criticism of modern pop culture that he readily observed Orwell making in the latter’s criticism of popular literature. His dismissal of David Bowie as ‘a drug-addicted, hedonistic rock star who had given little attention to recent history and literature’ is especially heavy handed, considering Bowie’s long shadow in today’s cultural zeitgeist and Bowie’s reputation for being culturally aware and concerned with justice (including racial justice, with Bowie’s criticism of MTV and their failure to play minority artists on air reminiscent of Orwell’s critique of British colonialism’s treatment of non-whites in the Empire.).
Read
February 28, 2021terminando bem a tempo do evento na Editora Tordesilhas sobre Orwell, com entrevista com o autor! Foi fascinante conhecer mais de Orwell e leria outras biografias sobre ele. Que cara complexo! ♥️
vale dizer que há MUITOS paralelos com os dias atuais, é realmente uma obra que traça muitos paralelos com Trump e Brexit.
vale dizer que há MUITOS paralelos com os dias atuais, é realmente uma obra que traça muitos paralelos com Trump e Brexit.
April 7, 2021
Está é uma excelente biografia, bem escrita e acessível. Um bom começo pra conhecer o escritor por trás das grandes obras 1984 e a revolução dos Bichos.
May 23, 2020
This book doesn’t break a lot of new ground, but it was an entertaining read. You can find my review of the book here: https://simplycharly.com/reviews/orwe....
July 29, 2020
I really enjoyed this book by Richard Bradford. This book is about Eric Arthur Blair, famously known as George Orwell, his life and views. George Orwell's father worked in the Opium Department of the Indian Civil Service and later George Orwell would serve as a British Imperial police officer in Burma. Orwell would later become a teacher in England and leave his teaching career to participate in the Spanish Civil War against Francisco Franco and the Fascists. During World War 2 George Orwell joined the Home Guard, an armed citizen militia supporting the English Army.
George Orwell is known for his novel "1984" where he criticizes authoritarianism found in Stalinist Russia. George Orwell was obviously a critic of the far right Nazi's of Italy and Germany as well. George Orwell was a socialist and supported Democratic Socialism and was against authoritarianism. I believe this book is a must read due to the fact that many Right Wingers today misuse George Orwell's writings for their own agenda. This was a good book and I learned many things about George Orwell's life.
George Orwell is known for his novel "1984" where he criticizes authoritarianism found in Stalinist Russia. George Orwell was obviously a critic of the far right Nazi's of Italy and Germany as well. George Orwell was a socialist and supported Democratic Socialism and was against authoritarianism. I believe this book is a must read due to the fact that many Right Wingers today misuse George Orwell's writings for their own agenda. This was a good book and I learned many things about George Orwell's life.
August 4, 2020
A good background biography of the man and his works, with the added advantage of some retrospective comparisons and projected outcomes with hindsight on how our present day society compares - contrasts, or concurs with his predictions: in a way this validates how astute his thinking was, and still is, with an open-ended warning that portends society could still be on a path towards fulfilling some aspects of his totalitarian vision - or has come to pass already in some countries.
November 2, 2020
The author tries really hard to make connections to modern day politics but totally fails in it. His attempts at this are incredibly far-fetched and frankly quite embarrassing. On top of the author's own political views shine through and reveal a frightening lack of any deep understanding of modern political climate. The lack of self-awareness is shocking.
At least the biographical parts are well enough ridden no to allow one to drudge through the short book.
At least the biographical parts are well enough ridden no to allow one to drudge through the short book.
October 10, 2022
Książkę tę charakteryzuje niski próg wejścia co uznaję za duży plus - jeśli twórczość Orwella znacie od podszewki z tej książki dowiecie się jeszcze więcej, a jeśli do tej pory jedynie słyszeliście o tytułach jego autorstwa to bez obaw, bo autor od do każdego wątku robi stosowne wprowadzenie.
Gdy pierwszy raz wzięłam tę pozycję do rąk obawiałam się, że niemalże 400 stron o życiu jednego pisarza będzie wypełnione wieloma informacji, które mnie nie zainteresują jednak na całe szczęście się myliłam. Wiadomo, że biografia to nie książka fabularna z wartką akcją, a mimo to z każdą stroną moja ciekawość wzrastała i nieustannie oczekiwałam na bycie zaskakiwaną przez autora nowymi wątkami. Bardzo podobało mi się odnoszenie wizji prezentowanych przez Orwella do obecnej rzeczywistości w jakiej funkcjonujemy – napięcia militarne, polityczne rozgrywki, Brexit? To wszystko Eric Artur Blair potrafił wyczuć wiele lat wcześniej. Zaletą tego tytułu jest również zakres tematów, które porusza, gdy znajdziemy tu informacje nie tylko dotyczące twórczości autora, ale także kilka mało znanych faktów z jego życia prywatnego. Była to postać barwna, z niestandardowym spojrzeniem na świat, a na jego twórczości wychowało się już wiele pokoleń, więc tym bardziej intrygująca jest aktualność jego wizji, o których możemy czytać w niniejszej pozycji.
Trudno jest oddzielać autora od jego dzieła, dlatego tym bardziej zachęcam do poznania od zaplecza tego jak Orwell tworzył i jak postrzegał otaczającą go rzeczywistość przekładając to na przyszłe dekady. Książka ta zawiera wiele ciekawostek, które do tej pory trudno było gdzieś indziej znaleźć. O rzetelności przedstawionych tu faktów świadczy obszerna bibliografia zamieszczona na ostatnich stronach. Jesteście gotowi na zmierzenie się z proroczym spojrzeniem i zakamarkami umysłu oraz życia codziennego znanego na całym świecie twórcy klasyki literatury? Gorąco zachęcam do zapoznania się z tym tytułem, gdyż ja nie tylko spędziłam z nim wartościowy czas ale również poszerzyłam dzięki niemu swoją wiedzę 😊
Gdy pierwszy raz wzięłam tę pozycję do rąk obawiałam się, że niemalże 400 stron o życiu jednego pisarza będzie wypełnione wieloma informacji, które mnie nie zainteresują jednak na całe szczęście się myliłam. Wiadomo, że biografia to nie książka fabularna z wartką akcją, a mimo to z każdą stroną moja ciekawość wzrastała i nieustannie oczekiwałam na bycie zaskakiwaną przez autora nowymi wątkami. Bardzo podobało mi się odnoszenie wizji prezentowanych przez Orwella do obecnej rzeczywistości w jakiej funkcjonujemy – napięcia militarne, polityczne rozgrywki, Brexit? To wszystko Eric Artur Blair potrafił wyczuć wiele lat wcześniej. Zaletą tego tytułu jest również zakres tematów, które porusza, gdy znajdziemy tu informacje nie tylko dotyczące twórczości autora, ale także kilka mało znanych faktów z jego życia prywatnego. Była to postać barwna, z niestandardowym spojrzeniem na świat, a na jego twórczości wychowało się już wiele pokoleń, więc tym bardziej intrygująca jest aktualność jego wizji, o których możemy czytać w niniejszej pozycji.
Trudno jest oddzielać autora od jego dzieła, dlatego tym bardziej zachęcam do poznania od zaplecza tego jak Orwell tworzył i jak postrzegał otaczającą go rzeczywistość przekładając to na przyszłe dekady. Książka ta zawiera wiele ciekawostek, które do tej pory trudno było gdzieś indziej znaleźć. O rzetelności przedstawionych tu faktów świadczy obszerna bibliografia zamieszczona na ostatnich stronach. Jesteście gotowi na zmierzenie się z proroczym spojrzeniem i zakamarkami umysłu oraz życia codziennego znanego na całym świecie twórcy klasyki literatury? Gorąco zachęcam do zapoznania się z tym tytułem, gdyż ja nie tylko spędziłam z nim wartościowy czas ale również poszerzyłam dzięki niemu swoją wiedzę 😊
Read
December 5, 2025A obra começa de maneira promissora, despertando interesse ao explorar a origem de Orwell, cujo nome verdadeiro era Eric Blair, destacando sua conexão com uma família envolvida no império britânico na Índia. O pai de Orwell, um funcionário imperial, tinha uma participação na produção de uma droga que causou danos em várias regiões, um detalhe que o autor da biografia usa para contextualizar o ambiente em que Orwell cresceu. Contudo, à medida que a leitura avança, a narrativa se torna cansativa, especialmente por causa das constantes tentativas de relacionar a vida de Orwell com questões políticas contemporâneas, como redes sociais, globalização ou o estado de vigilância atual. Essa abordagem parece, na minha opinião, desviar o foco da trajetória pessoal e literária de Orwell, transformando-o numa figura quase profética ou visionária, o que considero uma interpretação exagerada. A biografia tenta humanizar Orwell ao mostrar aspectos pessoais, incluindo traições à esposa, mas também reforça a ideia de que ele teria previsto o futuro, uma imagem que considero distorcida. Outro ponto que chama atenção é o esforço da narrativa em colocar Orwell como alguém que não entenderia o mundo atual, sugerindo que suas obras devem ser interpretadas apenas no contexto de sua época, entre 1903 e 1950. Essa postura, na minha avaliação, limita a compreensão do autor e acaba por reforçar uma visão mais realista, porém menos romântica, de Orwell como um homem inteligente e crítico, mas não um profeta. Em suma, a biografia tenta oferecer uma visão mais humanizada de Orwell, revelando suas contradições e questões pessoais, mas, ao mesmo tempo, perpetua a ideia de que ele foi uma espécie de oráculo que previu o futuro, o que considero uma interpretação equivocada. Essa combinação de elementos acaba por tornar a leitura cansativa e frustrante, levando-me a abandoná-la antes do seu final, pois senti que a narrativa se perdeu em análises políticas e conexões forçadas com o presente, em detrimento de uma compreensão mais autêntica da vida e obra de Orwell.
October 16, 2022
@wydawnictwoznakpl wydało „Orwella. Człowieka naszych czasów", czyli biografię napisaną przez Richarda Bradforda i przetłumaczoną przez Aleksandrę Żak i to w roku, w którym — nareszcie — Orwell stał się autorem maturalnej lektury obowiązkowej. Książka ta, której obszerna bibliografia zasługuje na uznanie, ukazuje, zgodnie z tytułem, że Eric Artur Blair to twórca-wieszcz, który przewidział aktualne problemy: kryzysy społeczne, militarne, polityczne, pracownicze, absurdalne prawo, które pozwala osobom w kryzysie bezdomności leżeć na betonie, ale pod karą wiezienia zabrania spania, a nawet Brexit. To pozycja dla tych, którzy zarówno znają twórczość pisarza, jak i tych, którzy dopiero zapoznają się z jego dorobkiem. Pierwsi zajmą się śledzeniem faktów biograficznych, drudzy uzyskają wnikliwą analizę problematyki podejmowanych przez niego zagadnień. Poczułam z Orwellem bliskość, która wynikała z wielkiego poczucia niesprawiedliwości społecznej i trudności z dostosowaniem się do reguł panujących w danych miejscach i organizacjach. Zaskoczyły mnie informacje o tym, jak bardzo nienawidził on edukacji formalnej, a także te, jak łatwo wyciągnięto wnioski, że był homofobem, chociaż reprezentował zupełnie odmienną postawę. Nie jest to jednak hołd na cześć pisarza. Nie ma tu laurek, dostrzeżono i prześledzono zmiany poglądów, jakie zachodziły w życiu Orwella, który przeszedł drogę z antysemity do głosiciela informacji o zbrodniach hitlerowskich, który wykazywał ich źródło w wypowiadanych pogardliwie słowach na temat ludności żydowskiej. Nie brak tu jeszcze jednej analizy: zachowania pełnego hipokryzji: wypominania antysemityzmu innym przez tych, którzy ze względu czy pozycję, lewicowe poglądy, ukrywają taką samą postawę pod płaszczykiem przyzwoitości (dwójmyślenie). Czy da się dziś mocniej wykazać absurdy podziałów politycznych, które doprowadzają do oportunizmu, bo albo „jesteś z nami", albo „przeciwko nam"?
#współpraca
#współpraca
March 3, 2021
As we used to say over here, I don't like to cast nastutiums, but this book could have really done with another few rewrites, a stronger reason for being, some footnotes and a little more research.
That said, it did throw around some interesting and challenging ideas. There's a hint (well maybe more than a hint) that Orwell was a bit of a pants man. I think this had been ignored in other biographies that I read. And I got the idea from the scenes in 1984 that the writer most likely detested sex in that particular English way. Guess he was striking a pose.
That said, it did throw around some interesting and challenging ideas. There's a hint (well maybe more than a hint) that Orwell was a bit of a pants man. I think this had been ignored in other biographies that I read. And I got the idea from the scenes in 1984 that the writer most likely detested sex in that particular English way. Guess he was striking a pose.
June 18, 2021
The problem I found with this book is that it tried to claim Orwell predicted current political events which I didn't find very convincing at all. Also the book veered off at times into bizarre attacks on Jeremy Corbyn which had no relevance to the focus of the book which should have been George Orwell. The attacks on Corbyn were supposed to be linked to political points in Orwell's life but the links were tenuous at best.
September 1, 2024
This is as much a biography of Orwell's enduring influence and relevance as it is of the man himself. Bradford, a Brit, again and again segues from Orwell's life to corollaries with British life and politics today. He also broadens that out to speculations of what Orwell might think of today's China and the plague that is Trump.
A bio that is sympathetic towards its subject, to be sure, but well worthwhile and thought-provoking.
A bio that is sympathetic towards its subject, to be sure, but well worthwhile and thought-provoking.
March 25, 2022
A highly readable combination of biography of George Orwell and exploration of how his writing a thought resonates with contemporary social and political issues. The author does not hide Orwell’s contradictions. It is not the most comprehensive biography on him but this is not the author’s primary intention. Certainly worth reading.
March 1, 2025
This was a book of two halves. I enjoyed how it interrogated parts of Orwell's life that other biographies just comment on and move on, and its made me consider finally tackling the three novels Clergymens daughter, coming up for air, aspidistra etc.
But on the otherhand I found the obsession with brexit and the attempt to reduce Orwell to left-liberal tiresome after awhile.
But on the otherhand I found the obsession with brexit and the attempt to reduce Orwell to left-liberal tiresome after awhile.
June 16, 2022
On the whole pretty interesting and a decent read. However the authors views on current political events seem to be rather biased and uncritical. Ultimately this reduces the authority of his views on Orwell.
June 30, 2023
After finishing the book, like other readers, I was leaning towards disagreement with some of Bradford's standpoints on certain topics. However, for the most part of the book, notably his reflection on what Orwell envisioned as "Newspeak" absolutely resonated and astonished me.
May 5, 2020
If you don't look at it as a definitive biography, but as a book that explains how Orwell's ideas are still relevant and how they can help us navigate these times, this is a book for you.
May 24, 2020
A INTERESTING BOOK.
December 11, 2020
Un interesante estudio de un magnifico libro en el cual todo se esta o estuvo convirtiendose en realidad.
September 21, 2022
Not sure what I was expecting so maybe this is not a fair review. I just thought it was a little dry and not particularly in lightning.
June 14, 2023
Endnu en bog der argumenterer ganske overbevisende for Orwells relevans i det 21. århundrede. Ganske tankevækkende
January 2, 2025
Kocham takie książki z innym spojrzeniem: w tym przypadku na Orwella we współczesnym kontekście. Orwell był nie tylko pisarzem, ale także wizjonerem.
December 7, 2024
An absolutely bonkers novel that decides when Orwell wrote Nineteen Eighty-Four and Animal Farm, he was foreshadowing the Vote Leave campaign (which told lies, yes, but didn’t torture people with rats, have them ripped apart by dogs or sold to the local knackers for a crate of whiskey), this book must read to Leave voters (of which I am not one) a too-good-to-be-true glimpse into the psyche of a hysterical Remainer. While I looked on the whole Brexit process with sadness, the way a Catholic views an unwanted pregnancy (it’s a tragedy but it has to be born) no way at all did I fall to the depths some Remainers did. That the author decides Orwell’s warnings can just be applied willy-nilly to whatever politics they don’t like is a further sign we just haven’t heeded the warnings
November 27, 2020
Excellently observed, of the depths of Orwell and his politics, his life and times, his prescience as shown by the present times. Richard Bradford is to be greatly respected for this wonderful portrayal.
March 5, 2020
Chilling in that Orwell seems to predict what is going on in these Trumpian times. A superb read.
Displaying 1 - 27 of 27 reviews