 |
| blog.ushanka.us |
Espinaxiones/
Estoy leyendo el librito de George Orwell. Estoy cuidando un aula de High School que lo tienen asignado como lectura. Creo que con el nuevo asesinato que han consumado en Cuba se le debe poner dificil la visita del Papa para abrazarse y darle las bendiciones a los asesinos. Ya habiamos comentado como la intercesion del Cardenal Jaime Ortega y Moratinos le saco las castañas del fuego al kaxtrato cuando peor se la vieron despues del asesinato de Orlando Zapata Tamayo, la potencial muerte de Fariñas en valiente, oportuna, consecuente y audaz huelga de hambre.
Despues del padrinazgo de los infames para que el kaxtrizmo continuara su curso en aguas mas tranquilas se han seguido cometiendo muchos crimenes como el de Laura Pollan y ahora el de Wilman Villar Mendoza, entre otros muchos, muchisimos aunque realmente no harian falta mas para el resume u hoja de vida de estos asesinos de 60 años o mas pues desde antes del Moncada en 1953 ya tenian las manos manchadas de sangre y otros delitos comunes pues muchos de ellos, de los principales sabemos todos eran drogadictos, proxenetas, expendedores y otras linduras que la prensa oficial, con tan buena memoria y capacidad investigativa no encuentra ni recuerda.
Que ni los Papas, ni los inocentes, ni los complices, ni Moratinos, ni el Cardenal Ortega, ni otros infames y miserables piensen que estamos hablando ni seran juzgados por solamente 3 o 5 crimenes, son miles y miles de asesinatos unos mas viles y repugnantes que otros pero todos con el costo de la vida humana, con un remolcador "13 de Marzo" y sus decenas de niños y mujeres asesinados con nocturnidad, premeditacion y alevosia en aquella madrugada de julio de 1994 seria suficiente para que el mundo abriera los ojos y se llenara de justa indignacion y feroz justicia contra el kaxtrato y los kaxtroz.
Despues del padrinazgo de los infames para que el kaxtrizmo continuara su curso en aguas mas tranquilas se han seguido cometiendo muchos crimenes como el de Laura Pollan y ahora el de Wilman Villar Mendoza, entre otros muchos, muchisimos aunque realmente no harian falta mas para el resume u hoja de vida de estos asesinos de 60 años o mas pues desde antes del Moncada en 1953 ya tenian las manos manchadas de sangre y otros delitos comunes pues muchos de ellos, de los principales sabemos todos eran drogadictos, proxenetas, expendedores y otras linduras que la prensa oficial, con tan buena memoria y capacidad investigativa no encuentra ni recuerda.
Que ni los Papas, ni los inocentes, ni los complices, ni Moratinos, ni el Cardenal Ortega, ni otros infames y miserables piensen que estamos hablando ni seran juzgados por solamente 3 o 5 crimenes, son miles y miles de asesinatos unos mas viles y repugnantes que otros pero todos con el costo de la vida humana, con un remolcador "13 de Marzo" y sus decenas de niños y mujeres asesinados con nocturnidad, premeditacion y alevosia en aquella madrugada de julio de 1994 seria suficiente para que el mundo abriera los ojos y se llenara de justa indignacion y feroz justicia contra el kaxtrato y los kaxtroz.
------------------------------------------------
"We were very lucky to get out of Spain alive," George Orwell wrote afterwards. He was not talking about the nearly fatal throat wound he suffered in combat during the Spanish Civil War but about Stalin‟s murderous political apparatchiks who had gained partial control of the Spanish government by 1937.
He had gone to Spain to fight for that government because he thought it represented political decency, and his belief in the importance of political decency had nearly been the end of him. More or less by chance, he had ended up a Trotskyist outfit at a time when Stalinists were trying to destroy every trace of Trotsky‟s contribution to the Russian revolution. These purges were directed from Moscow, but had deadly consequences even in faraway Spain, where Stalin was ostensibly supporting a democratic Spanish government.
"Many of our friends were shot, and others spent a long time in prison or simply disappeared," Orwell recalled in his preface to a 1947 Ukrainian-language edition of Animal Farm.
This narrow escape from the long reach of Moscow-style politics left him alarmed about the gullibility of other well-meaning, decent people in Western Europe. He thought too many decent people in the Western democracies had succumbed to a dangerously romantic view of the Russian revolution that blinded them to Soviet reality.
Soviet communism paid a heavy price for what it did to Orwell in Spain. Out of that experience came Animal Farm. An attack on the myth of the nobility of Soviet communism, Animal Farm became one of the century‟s most devastating literary acts of political destruction.
Orwell called the book "a fairy story." Like Voltaire‟s Candide, however, with which it bears comparison, it is too many other things to be so handily classified. It is also a political tract, a satire on human folly, a loud hee-haw at all who year for Utopia, an allegorical lesson, and a pretty good fable in the Aesop tradition. It is also a passionate sermon against the dangers of political innocence. The passage in which the loyal but stupid workhorse Boxer is sold to be turned into glue, hides, and bone meal because he is no longer useful is written out of a controlled and icy hatred for the cynicism of the Soviet system—but also out of despair for all deluded people who served it gladly.
Maybe because it gilds the philosophic pill with fairy-story trappings, Animal Farm has had an astonishing success for a book rooted in politics. Since its first publication at the end of World War II, it has been read by millions. With 1984, published three years later, it established Orwell as an important man of letters. It has enriched modern political discourse with the observation that "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others." How did we ever grasp the true nature of the politics of uplift before Orwell explained it so precisely?
George Orwell is the pen name of Eric Blair, the son of a colonial official with long service in British India. Eric was educated as a scholarship boy at Eton and seemed to be miserable there most of the time, largely, one guesses, because of the money gap that divided him from so many of his well-heeled schoolmates. His dislike of the moneyed classes in turn influenced him toward a lifelong loyalty to democratic socialism. After Eton he went to Burma as a member of the Imperial constabulary and had the enlightening experience of discovering he was hated by the Burmese people as a symbol of British imperialism. Hating the work himself, he quit, and came back to England to try making a living by writing.
During the years when he was not very successful he began to devote himself to work for British socialism. Afterwards he said he had never written anything good that was not about politics. Before he went to work on Animal Farm his books were well enough received by the critics but sold modestly.
Those old enough to remember the wartime spirit of the 1940s may be startled to realize that Orwell started work on Animal Farm in 1943. As he discovered when he went looking for a publisher, Stalin‟s Soviet Union was so popular that year in Britain and America that few wanted to hear or read anything critical of it. It was as though a great deal of the West had willingly put on blinders, and this was because the Red Army that year had fought the Nazis to a standstill and forced it to retreat. Suddenly Hitler‟s army, which had looked invincible for so long, had begun to look vincible.
In this period the air on both sides of the Atlantic was filled with a great deal of justifiable praise for the Soviet people and their fighting forces. Stalin‟s political system, with its bloody purges and police-state brutality, was an important beneficiary of all this. Looking for a publisher for his small book, Orwell was reminded that British socialists, who idealized the Russian revolution, had never been hospitable to critics of the Soviet Union. In 1943, however, even conservatives were pro-Soviet.
It became hard to write candidly of the Soviet system without being accused of playing dupe to the Nazis. Orwell discovered how hard when he began receiving publishers‟ rejections on Animal Farm. With its swinish communists, the book seemed heretical. And no wonder. Stalin and Trotsky, after all, were unmistakably Orwell‟s feuding pigs, Napoleon and Snowball. It was not until the war had ended that Fredric Warburg finally published it, on August 17, 1945.
It brought Orwell his first popular success, with sales in England vastly exceeding any of his previous books. In America, where it was published in 1946, it sold nearly 600,000 copies in four years and has not stopped selling since.
What‟s curious was Orwell‟s insistence that he had no intention of damaging the "socialist" cause. You would never have guessed this after reading the book, but he insisted that he intended only to write a cautionary story for the democratic West, warning it against a dangerously alien form of "socialism." Devoted to British socialism, Orwell cannot have found it very pleasant being denounced an enemy of what the Russians, and many of his countrymen too, called "socialism." Orwell, of course, was seldom happier than when he was attacking fraud and hypocrisy and hearing the squeals of the injured.
Despite his insistence on being "political" in his work, Orwell‟s career suggests his politics were the sort that real politicians detest. Why, for example, was Orwell so determined to make the case against Soviet communism at precisely the moment all proper people preferred not to hear it? Devoted socialist he may have been, but he had none of the politician‟s instinct for trimming sails to the wind when it is expedient to tell people what they want to hear. http://kisdwebs.katyisd.org/campuses/CRHS/teacherweb/englishii/Teacher%20Documents/6TH%20SIX%20WEEKS/Animal%20Farm%20Study%20Guide%20Packet%202011-12.pdf
He had gone to Spain to fight for that government because he thought it represented political decency, and his belief in the importance of political decency had nearly been the end of him. More or less by chance, he had ended up a Trotskyist outfit at a time when Stalinists were trying to destroy every trace of Trotsky‟s contribution to the Russian revolution. These purges were directed from Moscow, but had deadly consequences even in faraway Spain, where Stalin was ostensibly supporting a democratic Spanish government.
"Many of our friends were shot, and others spent a long time in prison or simply disappeared," Orwell recalled in his preface to a 1947 Ukrainian-language edition of Animal Farm.
This narrow escape from the long reach of Moscow-style politics left him alarmed about the gullibility of other well-meaning, decent people in Western Europe. He thought too many decent people in the Western democracies had succumbed to a dangerously romantic view of the Russian revolution that blinded them to Soviet reality.
Soviet communism paid a heavy price for what it did to Orwell in Spain. Out of that experience came Animal Farm. An attack on the myth of the nobility of Soviet communism, Animal Farm became one of the century‟s most devastating literary acts of political destruction.
Orwell called the book "a fairy story." Like Voltaire‟s Candide, however, with which it bears comparison, it is too many other things to be so handily classified. It is also a political tract, a satire on human folly, a loud hee-haw at all who year for Utopia, an allegorical lesson, and a pretty good fable in the Aesop tradition. It is also a passionate sermon against the dangers of political innocence. The passage in which the loyal but stupid workhorse Boxer is sold to be turned into glue, hides, and bone meal because he is no longer useful is written out of a controlled and icy hatred for the cynicism of the Soviet system—but also out of despair for all deluded people who served it gladly.
Maybe because it gilds the philosophic pill with fairy-story trappings, Animal Farm has had an astonishing success for a book rooted in politics. Since its first publication at the end of World War II, it has been read by millions. With 1984, published three years later, it established Orwell as an important man of letters. It has enriched modern political discourse with the observation that "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others." How did we ever grasp the true nature of the politics of uplift before Orwell explained it so precisely?
George Orwell is the pen name of Eric Blair, the son of a colonial official with long service in British India. Eric was educated as a scholarship boy at Eton and seemed to be miserable there most of the time, largely, one guesses, because of the money gap that divided him from so many of his well-heeled schoolmates. His dislike of the moneyed classes in turn influenced him toward a lifelong loyalty to democratic socialism. After Eton he went to Burma as a member of the Imperial constabulary and had the enlightening experience of discovering he was hated by the Burmese people as a symbol of British imperialism. Hating the work himself, he quit, and came back to England to try making a living by writing.
During the years when he was not very successful he began to devote himself to work for British socialism. Afterwards he said he had never written anything good that was not about politics. Before he went to work on Animal Farm his books were well enough received by the critics but sold modestly.
Those old enough to remember the wartime spirit of the 1940s may be startled to realize that Orwell started work on Animal Farm in 1943. As he discovered when he went looking for a publisher, Stalin‟s Soviet Union was so popular that year in Britain and America that few wanted to hear or read anything critical of it. It was as though a great deal of the West had willingly put on blinders, and this was because the Red Army that year had fought the Nazis to a standstill and forced it to retreat. Suddenly Hitler‟s army, which had looked invincible for so long, had begun to look vincible.
In this period the air on both sides of the Atlantic was filled with a great deal of justifiable praise for the Soviet people and their fighting forces. Stalin‟s political system, with its bloody purges and police-state brutality, was an important beneficiary of all this. Looking for a publisher for his small book, Orwell was reminded that British socialists, who idealized the Russian revolution, had never been hospitable to critics of the Soviet Union. In 1943, however, even conservatives were pro-Soviet.
It became hard to write candidly of the Soviet system without being accused of playing dupe to the Nazis. Orwell discovered how hard when he began receiving publishers‟ rejections on Animal Farm. With its swinish communists, the book seemed heretical. And no wonder. Stalin and Trotsky, after all, were unmistakably Orwell‟s feuding pigs, Napoleon and Snowball. It was not until the war had ended that Fredric Warburg finally published it, on August 17, 1945.
It brought Orwell his first popular success, with sales in England vastly exceeding any of his previous books. In America, where it was published in 1946, it sold nearly 600,000 copies in four years and has not stopped selling since.
What‟s curious was Orwell‟s insistence that he had no intention of damaging the "socialist" cause. You would never have guessed this after reading the book, but he insisted that he intended only to write a cautionary story for the democratic West, warning it against a dangerously alien form of "socialism." Devoted to British socialism, Orwell cannot have found it very pleasant being denounced an enemy of what the Russians, and many of his countrymen too, called "socialism." Orwell, of course, was seldom happier than when he was attacking fraud and hypocrisy and hearing the squeals of the injured.
Despite his insistence on being "political" in his work, Orwell‟s career suggests his politics were the sort that real politicians detest. Why, for example, was Orwell so determined to make the case against Soviet communism at precisely the moment all proper people preferred not to hear it? Devoted socialist he may have been, but he had none of the politician‟s instinct for trimming sails to the wind when it is expedient to tell people what they want to hear. http://kisdwebs.katyisd.org/campuses/CRHS/teacherweb/englishii/Teacher%20Documents/6TH%20SIX%20WEEKS/Animal%20Farm%20Study%20Guide%20Packet%202011-12.pdf
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario