The most dangerous game in The Hunger Games

Ladies and Gentlemen, The Hunger Games have begun. There is only one rule - no rules. Strikingly similar to a gladiator arena, Suzanne Collins takes us to an arena in a futuristic America, where 24 children are turned into beasts and forced to kill each other. Only one can survive.

The USA as we know it is destroyed. The Capitol, the powerful capital of the newly created country Panem controls the other 12 districts through deprivation, obedience and fear. The 13th district has been eliminated, when it rebelled against the controlled society. For remembrance and punishment, the Capitol has introduced a new form of entertainment - the Hunger Games. Each year a lottery chooses a boy and a girl between the age of 12 and 18 from each of the districts, who are thrown into an arena carefully controlled and managed by the game makers. Natural disasters, traps, and occasional gifts are thrown in order to turn the competitors against each other and to provide a bloody massacre for the viewers. This year, however, the organizers haven't taken in mind one factor - Katniss Everdeen.

Katniss has the unfortunate luck of living in the poorest of the districts - 12. No one from the district had won the Hunger Games in 30 years and the region is deprived from the awards associated with them. After her father's death in the mines she starts taking care of her mentally disabled mother and younger sister Prim. In order to feed her family in the most starving region of the Panem, Katniss daily breaks many rules - she escapes through the electric fence guarding the district, she hunts for wild animals, and she sells them on the black market. Together with her best friend Gale they have mastered the art of survival, while secretly dreaming of escaping. Katniss has this opportunity earlier than she imagined. On this year's Hunger Games her sister is chosen as a tribute, or a contestant. Without thinking, Katniss takes her place towards a sure death. The other tribute is Peeta, the quiet son of the baker, who has secret powers and a secret affection for Katniss.

The games have begun. The contestants are in the arena, thirsty for victory and blood. As usual, the trained tributes from the wealthiest regions have the edge, while Katniss is fighting hunger, thirst, and loneliness. Her training in the woods with Gale, however, has prepared her and she throws into the game with the greatest desire not to win but to stay alive - because this is what she has promised her little sister. The Hunger Games drive out the most animalistic features in these children, who in their acts resemble more wild animals set free than human beings with heart and soul. However, the Capitol hasn't taken into consideration that Katniss, Peeta, and several others actually feel. Katniss forms an unusual bond with a 12-year old girl from another district and desperately tries to protect her. Later, her life is saved by a contestant from the same region grateful for her help. But most importantly, Peeta is set to ensure that Katniss will survive.

"I just keep wishing I could think of a way to show them that they don't own me. If I'm gonna die, I wanna still be me." That is what Peeta wishes before the games have begun. However, this is exactly what the Capitol is trying to do - show people that they are owned, controlled, and can die just for the pleasure of the strongest. Violent death for some is a nice pleasure for others. In The Hunger Games Collins portrays a futuristic society that scarily reminds us of our own (without mentioning any names I would just like to point out that several months ago certain people were celebrating the death of another human being). Her talent to describe a dystopian future world is comparable to Orwell, Huxley, and Bradbury. The book is dark, violent, and consuming. Maybe because it is about children or maybe because it actually places people directly against each other, The Hunger Games had a greater impression on me than 1984 and A Brave New World. I kept asking my self what would I do if I was turned against 23 human beings with the highest stake - my life. It is immensely difficult to remain a human in this situation. It is almost impossible to feel compassion for someone, when you know you have to kill him to survive. Yet, Katniss and Peeta have something the Capitol hasn't expected - a great desire to stay alive TOGETHER. This might cost them their life but if they succeed it might cost the Capitol even more - its power.

I can't even begin to explain how obsessive, infatuating, and consuming this novel is. I don't have the time. My hands are trembling to get hold of the next book. For a trilogy named a bestseller from almost every newspaper, the first book The Hunger Games sets the stake very high. Given Collins's amazing imagination and great skills of a storyteller, I really doubt the following two will be worse.

Words of Wisdom Vol.1

For those that don't know, I have a pocket book, which I carry everywhere, but I don't show to anyone. No, I don't write there the names of the men I have slept with with some notes along (as in all of the cheesy movies we've seen). I'm a bit nerdy, so I write quotes. Obviously, quotes from novels I have read or quotes I have found inspirationalY. So far, I have accumulated quite a few of them and I decided it was time to share a bit of my so-called wisdom. Before closing the window with the idea that these are trivial quotes we all know and we all have read a million of times, I have to warn you, this is not the case. Indeed, some of them you might have heard, but I tend to like more unpopular ones, which meaning hasn't been lost because of endless repetition. In fact, I intend to make this a regular section of the blog, so here come Words of Wisdom Volume 1.

As a matter of fact, I tend to re-read them every time I feel the urge or need to do so. After careful investigation, I discovered I have a quote for almost every problem/issue/situation in life. I don't even have to think about what to say to my friends and relatives when they are having a hard time. I just open the pocket book and read them something. Unfortunately, most of them take it quite harsh, usually with the words "This is fiction. I am talking about real life problems here." I already expressed my opinion in a recent argument that literature as an art is NOT meaningless and pointless. I won't try to prove anything here. I will let you enjoy some of these quotes I have gathered and then think whether literature indeed can help you in some practical and tangible way.

"Time is the longest distance between two places."

"Prime numbers is what is left when you have taken all the patterns away. I think prime numbers are like life. They are very logical but you can never work out the rules even if you spend all of your time thinking about them."
The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time - Mark Haddon

"Money is only a too. It will take you wherever you wish but it will not replace you as the driver."
Ayn Rand

"You must never give yourself a chance to fall apart because when you do, it becomes a tendency and it happens over and over again. You must practice staying strong instead."

"We need to make books cool again. If you go home with somebody and they don't have books, don't fuck them."
John Waters

"Our words are giants when they do us injury and dwarfs when they do us service."
The Woman in White - Willkie Collins.

"Women can resist a man's love, a man's fame, a man's personal appearance, and a man's money but they cannot resist a man's tongue, when he knows how to talk to them."
The Woman in White - Willkie Collins.

"In most of these universes, the conditions would not be right for the development of complicated organisms; only in the few universes that are like ours would intelligent beings develop and ask the question:'Why is the universe the way we see it?' The answer is then simple: if it had been different, we would not be there."
A Brief History of Time - Stephen Hawking

"If you loved someone, you loved him. And when you had nothing else to give, you still gave him love."
1984 - George Orwell

"All men fear death. It is a natural fear that consumes us all. We fear death because we feel we haven't loved well enough or loved at all, which ultimately are one and the same. However, when you make love with a truly great woman, one that deserves the utmost respect in this world and one that makes you feel truly powerful, that fear of death completely disappears. Because when you are sharing your body and heart with a great woman, the world fades away. You two are the only ones in the entire universe. You conquer what most lesser men have never conquered before you, you have conquered a great woman's heart, the most vulnerable thing she can offer to another. Death no longer lingers in the mind. Fear no longer clouds your heart. Only passion for living and loving becomes your sole reality. This is not easy task for it takes insurmountable courage. But remember this, for that moment when you are making love with a woman of true greatness, you will feel immortal."
Ernest Hemingway.

"No matter how busy you may think you are, you must find time fr reading or surrender yourself to self-chosen ignorance."
Confucius

“My philosophy, in essence, is the concept of man as a heroic being, with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only absolute.”
Ain Rand

"Achievement of your happiness is the only moral purpose of your life, and that happiness, not pain or mindless self-indulgence, is the proof of your moral integrity, since it is the proof and the result of your loyalty to the achievement of your value."
Ayn Rand

"I swear, by my life and my love of it, that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine."
Ayn Rand

"The only regret I will have in dying is if it is not for love."
Love in the Times of Cholera - Gabriel Garcia Marquez

Enough for now. Take whatever you need from this but don't get overexcited. To end with a quote, as Oscar Wilde said it: Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation."

The Lord of the Flies Or Where Did the Series Lost Came From

We all know that the idea for the popular TV Show Big Brother came from Orwell's famous dystopia 1984. While we shamelessly enter the most personal lives of other people, while we watch them talk, communicate, fight, bath, go to the toilette, even have sex, we without any doubt don't realize the extremity of control in Orwell's world and the devastating effects of this control onto the human mind. But, as the Romans said it, people want bread and circuses.

Similarly, the TV series Lost, which last seasons I watched simply because I started to (otherwise they were complete bullshit) were inspired by a book. Not many people know it, but The Lord of the Flies by William Golding has strikingly similar plot to the popular TV show, and even one of the characters is named Jack. As always the original, the book, is far better than TV. But that is common sense of course.

The Noble-prize winner Golding tells about a group of British boys stuck on a deserted island. We don't know how and why they came her and frankly this is not important. The kids are left to what appears to be heaven. Without parental control and supervision, they should be free to play games, to enjoy the island, to hunt, to have fun, and in fact never to want to leave. Unfortunately, as life constantly shows us in the most painful way, sometimes the things we crave for are rarely the things we really need. The characters of the boys portray a wide picture of the human qualities and defaults. In that way Golding discusses the painful subject of human nature and individual welfare versus the common good. It is never stated but it is mostly implied that the story takes place during a possible Nuclear war. "The Reds" are mentioned several times, which of course points the mind to the Cold War.

The story is simple, the plot is trivial, but the impression and the intimation of the book are shocking and powerful. Three of the boys stand out among the huge crowd deserted on the island. Ralph represents the democratically elected leader. He is chosen not through coercion or persuasion but through the common democratic way - he wins the most votes in the beginning. Thus, the kids try to create their own mini-world where tasks are divided among people and the leader supervises and observes all. Unfortunately, their attempts are doomed to failure. The bifurcated human nature is predestined to rebellions, doubts, and conflicts. Ralph is a good leader but he lacks the most important leadership qualities - he is not forward-looking, inspiring, and convincing. At the beginning of the story he realized the importance of keeping a fire so that ships can see it and rescue them. As the boys spend more and more time on the deserted island, Ralph starts forgetting why they need the fire and most importantly, he forgets how to inspire and control the other boys. The result is anarchy.

Opposing Ralph is Jack. Jack, the hunter-boy, represents all the flaws in human nature. He is arrogant, impulsive, cruel, and selfish. Just like Ralph, he is born a leader, but when he loses the power, he starts an uprising to usurp it. The clash between the two boys shakes the stability and the peace on the island. Without cooperation, the salvation is impossible; the two opposing forces spend more time fighting each other than working together for the common good. Golding here is pessimistic about human nature. He realized that people will always strive to be on top for their own interests, disregarding what is best for the masses. Jack lurs the boys with promises of meat, fun, and freedom and is soon transformed into a form of semi-God. Ralph falls into exile slowly losing his supporters.

The most interesting character for me is undoubtedly Piggy. He is the most vulnerable to the ridicule of the other boys - with poor eyesight, astma, and weight problem. Piggy represents all those people in contemporary society who exist so that the insecure and powerless can have someone to exert their complexes on. Yet, Piggy is the most intellectual and wit of all the boys. Ralph's right hand, the boy represents the rational world and the adult figure. Unfortunately, he lacks leadership qualities and his advice to Ralph are not enough.

The world in The Lord of the Flies is not perfect; it is the conflict between the group and the individual, between morality and immorality, between the rational and the emotional thinking. Golding shows the strive of the civilization to live according to rules and the inevitable will for power and control from the strongest ones. This is not a story about kids; this is a story about adults and I see examples of it daily. How to ensure democracy and stability, how to obey the rules yet protecting our individuality, how to live as one, yet in a group, I still don't know the answers to these questions. After the terrible terrorist act in Norway a few days ago, I am even more pessimistic about human nature. There were, there are, and unfortunately there will be people, who see themselves as warriors for the world, who will attempt to change it through terror. Human nature is closer to the animals than we let ourselves to think; we are just not programmed to live in harmony and peace; we are doomed to self-destruction. It is our inherent trait, just like the original sin.

Matched - Condie's Dystopia Where the Society Decides How You Live, What You Work, Whom You Marry, and When You Die

I finished another dystopia in the style of the famous Zamyatin, Huxley, Orwell, Bradbury, and Burgess. Matched by the still young and inexperienced author Ally Condie learns from the best; yet the novel lacks the power, strength, gloominess, and total desperation of the famous predecessors. Still, a rather good read proving that dystopia is not dead and even more important now in the light of our technology-dominated world.

In Condie's world society controls everything - the way you live, whom you marry, what you eat, where you work, and even how you die. People live a life pre-determined by the Officials. Freedom seems a small price to pay in exchange for a well-regulated, healthy, and successful life. Cassia is a girl, who strongly believes in the Society and its means of guiding life. At the age of 17th she is to be assigned a life-partner based on thorough investigations about her character. She is to be "matched". In her lucky case, to her best friend Xander. His friendly face appears on the screen as the best match for a husband, securing a long happy life and healthy offspring. For a moment, though, another face flashes, the fase of the strange Ky. This sets Cassia to doubt the matching, to mistrust the society, and the oppose the choice that has been forced upon her.

Matched is a novel mostly about freedom of choice. Are we ready to abandon this luxury for a comfortable life? Indeed, through technological investigations society has established a perfect world. People are assigned jobs that match their character. All of them are specialists in their field knowing nothing about other fields though. They follow a carefully prepared personal diet that provides the exact amount of calories needed. They are matched to the most suitable member of the opposite sex and their children have the perfect genes. And exactly at the age of 80 people have to die. Society has decided that this is the perfect age to live the world and in a sort of way help people do so. In this obvious perfection, Cassia falls in love with Ky, who is a deviation. He is not "right" and "perfect" according to the norms of society. He is different. And the different are not to be tolerated or let to live according to their rules. In Matched, we see the imperfections of a perfect world, who limits the individuals. The only thing that sets them free is love.

The previous examples of dystopian novels also used love as a trigger for change. The characters in 1984, Brave New World, and We started doubting the status quo the moment they fell in love with the wrong person. In Matched, love is the central theme. The lack of freedom in love suffocates Cassia and prompts her to fight the Officials, to abandon the security, and to isolate from society in order to find Ky. This is a really wonderful love story in the light of dystopia. Although it doesn't have the literary qualities of the other dystopian novels and in times it is largely predictable, Matched should be read. At least, it leaves you with a good taste in your mouth and with a hope that may be totalitarian regimes could be overcome with the power of love. Something that Orwell, Huxley, and Zamyatin certainly don't believe.

"We" is Bigger Than "I" in Zamyatin's Dystopian World

Before George Orwell, Anthony Burgess

Ray Bradbury, and Aldus Huxley, there was the pioneer of the dystopian novel. The first man who wrote a shocking novel about the extremities of totalitarianism and control was actually Russian. Yes, Orwell, Bradbury, and Huxley were taught about socialist dictatorship by no other but Yevgeny Zamyatin.

We was published in 1926 as a response of the author's personal experiences during the Russian revolutions in 1906 and in 1917. The dystopian world of We is set in the future, where people do not have names but numbers. Males have odd numbers prefixed by consonants while women - even number prefixed by vowels. All of these "numbers" wear identical clothes, sleep in identical places, and are subject to the ideal of industrial efficiency. Human beings are screws in a machine - the "I" is not important; the "We" creates the state. The whole country is made up of glass as to facilitate control by the secret police and the spies. The ruler is (and has been for quite some time) the same one, the Benefactor, always chosen non-anonymously, as there is no other candidate. The control over society is secured by the successful victory over the two things that drive it - hunger and sex. People eat only mechanically prepared food (the ancient, or future equivalent of GMO) and have sex with whomever they want but only in the pre-determined hours.

In the light of this totalitarian regime, the main character is D-503. He is the builder of the Integral, a space ship supposed to take the logic of the One State to the rest of the universe. However, love and affection mess up the mechanically functioning mind of D-503. He begins doubting the regime and its sustainability and he visits a doctor, fearing he might be having a soul. The reason for his rebellion is a woman, an idea followed by Orwell and Huxley as well. I-330 is magnetic, sensual, and sexual. She dreams of life outside of the wall that surounds the state from the wild nature. She smokes, drinks, and experience the pure pleasure of sexual affairs. Her character and passion attempt to shaken the carefully mechanized world in which D-503 lives.

The Integral that is supposed to send the message of power and control to other nations is analogous to the Marxist's view of a Global Communist state. The focus is on industry and mechanization, which break down actions to easily understood and performed tasks, which require no imagination or creativity. D-503 writes a poem, the initial purpose of which is to share with the others the happiness and wisdom of the One State. Zamyatin here is disgusted with the use of literature by the communists to manipulate and shape public opinion. D-503's poem is a manifesto of conformity and equality but as the protagonist begins to experience his "soul", his attitude towards the regime understandably changes.

We certainly set the beginning of the dystopian novels that widely spread in the second half of the 20th century. Authors were fascinated with the topic of totalitarianism gone mad, especially in the light of the USSR and its rise to power. In We every hour of life is determined by The Table, a precursor of 1984's telescreen. The benefactor is the equivalent of Orwell's Big Brother. The similarities with Brave New World are even more obvious - the control of sex, the focus on industrialization and mechanization, the lack of the family, and the programming of people to love the regime that deprives them. Huxley indeed goes a bit further with his society of promiscuous conformists, pleasure seekers, and happy consumers.

To be honest Zamyatin is not as good as the other authors that followed him. His novel is still a child in its ideas about the endless possibilities of control mechanisms over the society. yet, the Russian is the first one to see through the idea of social equality and to the devastating effects its extreme form might lead in a futuristic world. In that sense, his contribution to the future development of the dystopian literature is incomparable.

Communism, Oops, I mean Animalism

1984 by George Orwell is a manifestation of the failure of communist regimes, which fail when their leaders become corrupted with power and start serving their own interests rather than the interests of those, who they are meant to serve. But before inventing the utopian world of 1984 with its new language, Newspeak, used to transform reality, to turn black into white, and to conceal important truths, Orwell wrote Animal Farm.

The subtitle is 'A Fairy Story'. Indeed, in Animal Farm animals behave, speak, and think like human beings. However, unlike a fairy story, the novel doesn't have a happy ending. It tells the story of a revolution, that had the best intentions to change the lives of the animals in Manor farm for the better by overthrowing their cruel owner. However, the leaders become corrupted with power and the initial ideals are carefully modified in order to serve not the community, but the chosen few. 'All animals are equal' turns into 'All animals are equal but some animals are more equal'. Sounds familiar, doesn't it?

Animal Farm is a witty allegory of the Russian revolution and its terrible consequences in the Soviet Union. At the beginning of the novel Major, a forward looking pig sets the principles of Animalism, according to which animals should be working for themselves, and not for the human beings. All animals are equal and should share the benefits of their work. Similarly, Lenin, highly influenced by Marx, presented the postulates of communism, which triggered the Russian revolution in 1917. Unfortunately, Major dies and the struggle for power is divided between the two pigs Napoleon and Snowfall. Eventually, Napoleon overthrows his opponent largely through methods of fear and terror. Snowball is exiled from the farm and is now portrayed as an enemy to the principles of Animalism. Similarly, Trotsky is outcast from the Soviet Union by Stalin.

As Napoleon gains more power, he orders working conditions and targets, which are hard for the other animals to achieve. Some of them still work hard because they believe in the initial principles of Animalism. Slowly, however, these principles become perversely changed in order to serve the pigs, who become the chosen few in the farm. Analogically, Stalin uses terror and secret police to control people and to hide the true severe conditions in the Soviet Union.

Eventually, the animals suffer even more than before the revolution. They are forced to work longer hours, they starve, and they are suppressed by Napoleon and his army of fierce dogs. The new commandments of animalism allow the pigs to enjoy a lifestyle similar to Mr Jones's, the previous owner. They drink, wear human clothes, play cards, and sleep in beds, all of which contradict the initial principles set up by Manor. Obviously, Stalin and his loyal supporters also formed a higher class, which enjoyed the benefits of power.


The Flag of Animalism. Quite resembling something familiar, eh?

The revolution in Animal Farm (and in Russia accordingly) fell apart not because of the principles of equality. It fell apart because the leaders became corrupted. They served themselves and not the community, slowly but surely turning into the dictators they so wanted to overthrow in the first place. Orwell ingeniously points out the shortcomings of totalitarianism, and on a larger scale the shortcomings of the human behavior. Animal Farm is a political satire with all the powers of a myth. It is also a realistic examination of the importance of honesty and truth, two things the world desperately needs after the two world wars.

Orwell believed in the values of democratic Socialism and liberal and social conscience. His works have influenced many writers to focus on the communist myth (especially the Soviet one) and the reasons for its collapse. Ray Bradbury, Aldous Huxley, Anthony Burgess, and George Orwell, all authors use quite different, yet witty and profound perspective to investigate the devastating effects of a world, where truth is concealed, mind is controlled, and people are severely suppressed with the false illusion of equality.

Strangely, a book against informational propaganda was in fact negatively affected by this same propaganda. Animal Farm was finished in 1943, during the Second World War but was published late in 1945. The reasons: at the end of the war the Soviet Union was a British ally against Hitler's Germany. Thus, it was seen by many political leaders that Stalin and Soviet Communism should not be criticized, even indirectly. God bless, though, Orwell was not one to be persuaded by such orthodox views. His novel, a precise attack on the failure of the Russian revolution was published.

I will finish off with a sentence I saw in a movie last night, which I believe very well adapts to the topic. The use of information and disinformation is ultimately power. The Soviet communists are well aware of this fact and effectively use it to establish and stabilize their power.

A Clockwork Orange - Burgess's Rebellion against Political Brainwashing

"A clockwork orange is a creature capable of doing only good or evil - an organic entity, full of juice and sweetness and agreeable odour, being turned into an automaton". A Clockwork Orange is Anthony Burgess's rebellion against brainwashing and political suppression. Born in 1961, the novel shocked the audience with its frightening ideas about a social order, controlled by the ultimate political power. Nearly 50 years later, Burgess is acknowledged as a prophet; his rebellion against a depersonalized system, which creates identical individuals driven by their animal instincts and forced to obey mechanical laws is more true now than ever.

The protagonist and story-teller, Alex, is a 15-years-old rebel, who wanders around the streets of London with his friends, Peter, Georgie, and Dim. The boy is positively conditioned to feelings of evil, which prevent his exercise of free will. Alex and his friends enjoy robbing, beating, and raping other people; their life is subjected to constant violence and crimes. The rebellion of Alex somewhat reminds the reader of Holden Caulfield in Catcher in the Rye. Yet, Burgess's character is much more brutal, cynical, and sinister. Despite Alex's agressive actions, the reader feels empathy towards the young boy. Born and raised in a political regime, which suppresses people's free will and conditions them to either good or evil, Alex is destined to go the wrong way. The boy expresses his rebellion through deliberately hurting other people. In one of their games of fun, Alex and his friends accidentally kill an old woman. Left behind by his so-called buddies, Alex is imprisoned for murder. After several years spent in prison, the boy is offered sudden freedom in exchange of participating in a so-called behavior-modification treatment, called the Ludovico Technique. Alex is forced to watch violent movies, the result being he feels nausea at the mere thought of violence. The results after this questionable method are difficult to analyze. It seems as if the government is doing society a favor by eliminating violent behavior in criminals; in reality, this brainwashing is a warning against the dangerous control of the human mind. The progress of medicine allows certain political parties and groups to use medicaments and techniques to eliminate free will and to substitute it with a frightening form of control, which distorts a person's ability to exercise his right to choose. Aldous Huxley and George Orwell have expressed similar ideas respectively in Brave New World and 1984 by portraying a society of identical individuals, controlled through different mechanisms in order to obey to a political doctrine. In A Clockwork Orange, Burgess depicts the socially unacceptable brainwashing of people through the story of a single individual. Despite the strange situations, in which Alex finds himself, the reader still feels close to his sufferings. After all, as Burgess implies, we must not let ourselves become clockwork oranges - people driven by their animal instincts or controlled by mechanical powers. We must protect and fight for our right to choose.

One of the most interesting aspects of A Clockwork Orange is the language in which Alex and his gang speak. A mixture of English, Russian, Gypsy, German, and a language invented by Burgess himself, this language style contributes to the immense philosophical power of the book. In 1961 the author predicted that in several decades people will be talking mainly in two languages - English and Russian. From my point-of-view this cannot be more true. Having studied in English for more than 7 years now, I constantly use English words in my everyday dictionary and so do my friends. Globalization is spreading at such a fast rate, that borders, languages, and nationalities have less and less meaning. This strange language is called by Burgess Nadsad. I benefit from speaking both Russian and English and I understand quite easily all the words. For the non-Russian speaking readers of Burgess, though, comprehending the novel was much more difficult. Still, Burgess refused to provide a dictionary for his invented language; the author claimed that the novel must be felt rather than understood completely.

The meaning of the title is of a surrealistic individual with a mechanism. Burgess has learned that in Malaysian orang means human. This is how the author came up with the rather unusual concept of an orange driven my mechanical laws. Burgess's life also contributed to his infatuation with the concepts of good and evil. His first wife was beaten up and lost their child. While he spent time in the USSR with his second wife, Burgess noticed that the young gangs run wild unpunished by the police, whose main aim is to protect the Communist power.

A Clockwork Orange is not a bite for every mouth. It is brutal, vulgar, cynical, and violent. The way Alex and his friends speak and think, their actions and lack of social conscience is frightening. Yet the author ingeniously points out that artificially conditioning them to do only good is not a better alternative either. This mechanical intervention into the complexities of the human mind creates clockwork oranges - people driven by mechanical laws rather than by their free will. The novel, as 1984 and A Brave New World, is revolutionary for its time. It criticizes a social order that has not yet appeared but with the advancements of technology and medicine is scarily very close to us.

It is unnecessarily to say that I loved the book a lot. I was amazed by Burgess's style, by his invention of a totally new language, by his ability to portray the rebellion of a single individual against a socially wrong system, something no author has done in such a dimension. Interestingly, the last, 21st chapter was not published in the US until 1986. In it, the protagonist Alex finally sees the errors of his lifestyle, decides against violence, and commits to changing his life. Publishers in the US told Burgess that readers would never go for the last chapter and Alex's transformation. Even the film adaption of Stanley Kubrick, which became a hit, did not feature this last chapter. Kubrick sees it as inconsistent and unconvincing. Still, Burgess's idea of originally using 21 chapters divided into three parts of 7 chapters had its meaning; the author believed that the age of 21 was a milestone, upon which a character enters into maturity and realizes his mistakes. I am glad this translation in Bulgarian includes the last chapter, because this was the original intention of the author. Anthony Burgess is brilliant and I have no doubt in his better judgement.

PS: Thanks to A Clockwork Orange I met Hristo from Knigolandia. He asked me while I was reading the book in a cafe whether I liked the translation. Having read the whole novel I must admit I love it. Being the second translation of the book after censorship in 1989 fell, I believe the translator has done an amazing job in capturing Burgess's ideas, yet sounding modern and close to contemporary youths.

My Experience on the Sofia Book Market

The annual Sofia Book Market is a fact. From 7th to 12th of December the National Culture Palace becomes the center of a reading fever. All publishers and bookstores are there, presenting their most famous bestsellers and trying desperately to make the ever so poor Bulgarian reader spare some money on a new book (s). Of course, there is 20% off on every novel you purchase, which is a very good reason to at least think about improving your library.

I do not need to mention that I was there the first day the market opened. I spent 2 blissful hours going around it, checking out new and old books, making a list of all the novels I wanted to buy, smelling new books, asking questions. Basically, I has having the time of my life. I was pleasantly surprised by the initiative of the French Institute. The latter created a reading cafe in the middle of the market, where one can sit, go through some of the contemporary (and no so contemporary) French pieces of literature and just read. Basically, you can sit there the whole day, surrounded by the smell of books and read with no fee at all. You don't have to buy a book or pay anything; you are entitled to read as much as you want. I took advantage of this opportunity and that is how I stumbled on a book, which I bought afterwards.

Laurent Gounelle's L'Homme Qui Voulait Etre Heureux (The Man Who Wanted to be Happy) attracted me firstly with its title and then with the description on the back. Gounelle is a French psychologist and writer, who explores the problems of human happiness and mental equilibrium. As my mom says lately I am more and more into psychological books, novels that explore the nature of human content and stability, novels that help you discover who you really are and what you want out of life. By exploring so many different aspects, I get closer to understanding myself and my dreams. I also realize I am not the person I thought I was. I realize the dreams I thought would make me happy upon achievement do not bring anything but mere resentment and disappointment because I am still not happy. That is why I am determined (and actually fascinated by the possibility) to read as many self help, self understand, or whatever those books might be called. Some are very good (Eat Pray Love) some do not work for me (Froth on the Capuchino) and others just transform my world view completely (Ayn Rand's literature, although she is not really a self-help type of writer). I can't wait to see what Gounelle has to say about the subject since once more I will have the chance to touch the Buddhist culture and way of thinking through exploring L'Homme Qui Voulait Etre Heureux.

Of course I didn't want to limit myself to only buying one book but unfortunately due to budget restraints I had to. I nevertheless made a list of all the books I wanted to buy eventually (so that I do not forget) and I attempted to convince my mother that I absolutely desperately need all of them. She was not that sure at all, given that my room starts to look more like a library than like a living space ( I literally have no space to accomodate my books already) + she doesn't really believe in buying books. She is the type "I will borrow from the public library" type. I am different, so I am determined to own these novels one way or another. So here is my wish list for next couple of months:

1. Anne Heller - Ayn Rand and the World She Made
2. James Clavell - Shogun
3. Ray Bradbury - All
4. George Orwell - Animal Farm
5. Arthur Clarke - A Space Odyssey














If you still haven't visited Sofia Book Market, I urge you to do so. We must support this amazing initiative and prove that Bulgarians still read and are still ready to spare some cash for a good book.

I write like...

I never really thought about my writing style. Actually, I never really thought I had one. In school I was always better in science than in literature; mathematics has been my favorite subject, while every attempt to produce an interesting essay was a disaster. That is why many of my relatives found it extremely surprising that I started managing my own blog dedicated not only to reading but to writing. And writing for me is now a passion almost as strong as reading. After finishing a novel I just can't wait to pour my thoughts in my blog while they are fresh. The results are not always admirable but I believe that practice makes perfect so I keep struggling. 

While browsing through other literary blogs I found an interesting website, which analyses your writing style and compares it to an existing author. In http://iwl.me/ you can paste any writing you have done - an essay, a blog post, memoirs, basically whatever you feel like it. To be honest, I tried many times because I was never satisfied with the answer as I kept getting authors I hadn't heard. One time I got George Orwell and another time I got Jane Austen. However, the posts I pasted for these results were related to 1984 and Pride and Prejudice respectively. Which, of course, does prove that http://iwl.me/ is not a powerful analyzing tool but at least it is fun. 

Finally, after trying almost all of my posts I found a trend. Several times the result was H.P. Lovecraft. I didn't know who that was or what he was writing about but since I was copying his style unintentionally, I decided to check him out. I was shocked by the result:

Howard Philips Lovecraft, born in 1890, is an American horror, fantasy, and science fiction writer. His guiding literary principle, cosmic horror refers to the idea that life is incomprehensible to the human mind and the universe is fundamentally alien. Regarded as one of the best horror authors, Lovecraft focuses on themes such as forbidden knowledge, fate, inherited guilt, and civilization under threat.

Okay, the least I can say about this result is that it is largely weird. First and foremost, I do not enjoy horror and fantasy novels. To be honest, I believe the only horror and fantasy novel I have read remains Harry Potter, which is may be scary for a 10 year old. Secondly, his principle, cosmic horror, doesn't match my believes or perceptions in any way. Indeed I insist that life is comprehensible through two routes - knowledge and experience. Finally, the themes he focuses on are fundamentally important but still, they are quite common to many authors. 

As I mentioned, the tool analyzes the themes in your post and the language used. Maybe on some level Lovecraft and I use a common set of words or tend to express our ideas in a similar way. Still, I do not believe I will be reading any of his novels. The only thing I quite enjoy about him is his name. :)

Beware!!! George Orwell's 1984 comes to life

No, this is not some nasty joke. No, I didn't lose my sanity due to overstudying. And no, definitely, this is not another American movie. This is the story of the most secret country on Earth, the Democratic (stressing on the term "democratic") People's Republic of Korea.

Having finished Aldous Huxley's Brave New World, in my previous post I argued that we are closer to a softer, genetically engineered form of totalitarianism and that Orwell's hard and brutal controlled state is a unattainable fantastic vision. A BBC video I watched today shocked me and made me think that maybe Orwell was a relative to Nostradamus in some distant way.

The BBC reporter's visit to North Korea portrayed terrible revelations. The planned economy claims to produce enough to feed the population, yet 1/3 of the people do not receive a proper diet, the army has privilege over any food, power shortages are a common everyday, and many citizens live in primitivity and misery. People believe their Great Leader, the founder of the state, is immortal God and rules even from the after life. His son, the Dear Leader, is in charge of running things in this life.

I believe that the Dear Leader indeed has Orwell's 1984 on a special place in his library because he has thoroughly applied all the methods of planned economy and brutal totalitarian control in North Korea. Powerful propaganda has taught people to be submissive and content with their life. In the military museum one recognizes Orwell's model of rewriting history. Common people believe that the Dear Leader has provided modern houses and farm mechanization, yet citizens live in primitive and poor conditions and the only tractor one sees is given from the EU. The government has ingeniously realized the need of a hateful enemy to keep people scary and under control. In this case, the "bad guys" are of course the USA. Similarly to Orwell's model, any access to the outside world is strictly forbidden. The population has its own form of intranet, with information the leader believe they should possess. None of them have heard of the World Wide Web or Google. The only leaders citizens admire (after the semi-God, immortal, or whatever Great Leader and his son the Dear Leader) are Stalin and Mao. And the most "real reality" they are exposed to is the US movie The Sound of Music. Great source of reality, indeed...

Judging North Korean people's naivety and ignorance is out of the question. How are they supposed to know if no one told them? How are they supposed to know there is a life outside this planned and controlled state, when they are not allowed to leave the country? As scary as Orwell's novel appeared to me when I read it, I never believed it could actually be realized in our contemporary world. North Korea seems to be part of the 21st century, but it poses a threat to the safety and values of the rest of the countries.

Even children, the most innocent human beings, are under the powerful propaganda as they are made to sing songs about how happy they are with their current life and how they do not envy the West for anything. But how could they envy something they haven't seen or experienced?

The battle between Orwell's hard brutality and Huxley's soft promiscuity continues. I don't know who the winner will be yet but I am terrified if those are our only options for the future - horror, subordination, and control, or sex, drugs, and blissful unawareness. As Huxley said "You pays your money and you takes your choice".

Community, Identity, Stability

In the week following scientists' announcement of the development of the first living cell controlled by synthetic DNA, I finished reading Aldous Huxley's anti-Utopian novel Brave New World. A coincidence or a mere destiny, I was inspired to think about genetic engineering, technological development, and the advancement of science as it affects the life of human beings.

In the latter half of the 20th century two books have attempted to cast their predictions on our future. While George Orwell's 1984 portrays a form of hard brutal mind-controlling state of Totalitarianism, Huxley proposes a different, softer view, where technology helps achieve the three logos of the World State "Community, Identity, Stability"

Far in the future controllers have created the ideal society through genetic engineering, brainwashing and recreational use of sex and drugs. The standardized citizens are not born, but grown in hatcheries, where under careful hypnopaedia they are divided into a caste system and programmed to love their predestined social role. The inhabitants are beautiful, free, and secure from any diseases and worries, and if anything ever goes wrong, they have the drug soma to help them take a holiday from reality. Knowledge is limited to serve only the social role predetermined to the different caste systems - Alpha Plus individuals are prepared to be the future World Controllers, while lower classes such as Gamma and Delta are happy being servants and workers.

Huxley portrays a society of happy consumers, pleasure-seekers, and promiscuous conformists . Using brainwashing and genetic engineering since infancy individuals are programmed to love the virtues of passive obedience and limited knowledge and to enjoy a uncomplicated life, where everyone belongs to everyone else, where everything is available, but nothing has a real meaning. Sex and drugs are recreational and to commit to monogamy and fidelity is considered unnatural and ingeniously selfish. The only other alternative Huxley presents is living among the Savages, who live in terrible conditions of dirt, fear, diseases, anguish, blood, sweat, but still marry, love, worship, and have FREE WILL AND FREEDOM. The Savage, John, dreams of this "Brave New World", where people are happy and untroubled, but upon seeing it he realizes the artificiality, simplicity, and elementariness of this new world older.

Huxley ingeniously understands that in order to secure a stable totalitarian regime, people must not be forced, but instead programmed to love what they are doing. The Communist regime in Russian and the Nazi take over both began as Utopian visions but failed to create stability through coercion. In Brave New World Huxley offers community, identity, stability and eternal happiness but at what cost? Individuals are standardized to enjoy the limit of their knowledge, the pleasure of sex and drugs, and the carefree and untroubled life. Instead of fighting issues, pain, and anguish World Controllers simply eliminate them. Individuals do not have a free will, but the biggest issue is that they do not want a free will, do not dream of change, do not desire something different because they have been carefully programmed not to.

As scary and extreme as this sounds, one can inevitably question: "Are we that far from that state of life". As the recent scientific invention of artificial cell will allow the creation of good genetics and bad genetics, society will have the chance to design individuals in the way it sees fit. In his novel Huxley presents the inherent ambiguity of human kind: we indeed dream of eternal happiness, health, and sexual pleasures. In the same time, individuals still believe there is some meaning of life beyond simply enjoying it, that knowledge, worship, love, pain, and disease in their real sense contribute to making us really human. Because even though the Brave New World is perfect, it is far from human, as it deprives its members from the possibility of free choice, of real feelings, not constrained by drugs, and of real connection to another human being.

A nerd? A passionate reader? A book lover?

Another birthday is over and yet life continues in its normal direction. And for me that direction is rather unfortunate since it involves a large amount of exam stress.

On the subject. As lovely as my birthday was, it was made even lovelier by the amount of books I received as gifts. Only slight concern: do people actually think the only thing I do is read and drink wine?

I got three as different books as you can possibly imagine. My lovely flatmates surprised me in the morning with 101 Essential Tips to Everyday Meditation. I have always longed to try meditating but I always postponed it with the excuse that maybe it is too hard and I won't be able to achieve it. I have no more excuses now so beware meditation, here I come. I hope it really reduces the levels of stress in my life, which are pretty high right now. The next book is Brave New World by Aldous Huxley. As mentioned under one of my posts, it is a necessary complementary reading to 1984 by George Orwell and Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury. Can't wait to be dipped into yet another book about the human race degradation into control, unhappiness, and emotional poverty. As a rule, I saved the best for last. A very special person gave me Ayn Rand's new book We the Living. According to the summary, this novel is going to be both quite different and the same to Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead. I know that sounds like an oxymoron, but Rand chooses to focus on life in the USSR and to explore the extreme level of dictatorship in one of the most influential countries. In the same time, the author elaborates on the clash between the Man and the State, which can be related to the clash between the Man and the Society in her two other powerful works.


It is so unfortunate that I have exams right now and have absolutely no time to devote to these three amazing books expecting me on the shelf. Sadly, the only reviews I can write now are about investment analysis and business economics. Three weeks and here comes summer!

Hammer & Sickle or the Power of Totalitarian Propaganda

Where did Big Brother come from? If your answer is "Australia", "BBC", or "Niki Kunchev invented him" (you will only get this joke if you are Bulgarian) then you better stick this post on your wall.

As the title suggests I am going to focus on a rather controversial issue: totalitarianism. I am from Bulgaria, once under USSR communist influence, but now a democratic country (at least that's what we believe). I have never lived in communism ( if we don't count those 5 months since I was born and before communism in Bulgaria ended but I don't really have any valuable memories from that time) but my parents and grandparents have. And all I hear is: "Oh, it was safer, people were equal, there was no poverty and unhappiness". To what extent that was true and to what extent were they under powerful propaganda I cannot say and I am not inclined to judge either.

Now on the books. Two novels, which I desperately recommend, have focused on what will happen if totalitarianism not only spread but developped. George Orwell's 1984 presents a utopian world, where The Party controls not only people's lifes, but their thoughts, emotions, and feelings. Big Brother's voice (like in the reality show) sounds in every home, sees everything, and tells people what to do and how to behave. Winston's job is to change history by changing the newspaper's articles depending on the Party's political moves at that time. However, he meets a girl, and together, they try to reveal the roots behind the Party's power over people.

In Farenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury, Montag lives in a society where books are illegal (IMAGINE THAT!). His job is to burn all books, except those that serve the Party's propaganda. 451 refers to the degrees, at which paper burns. Similarly to Winston, a woman changes his perspective and provokes him to search for answers beneath the ordered totalitarian world.

Both novels are masterpieces, although I personally prefer 1984. It focuses more on the totalitarian regime and its ways to control people, to ensure their subordination, and to prevent acts of disobedience. I have read the novel twice and it always sends shivers through my body. What if we ever reach that state? Can you imagine being told what to think, how to feel, where to go, and how to act...

I can't wait to read Ayn Rand's essays on the subjects. She had to fleet the USSR and she expresses a rather firm opinion (that's Ayn Rand after all, she always has a firm opinion!) on totalitarianism and capitalism. I am sure here works would be worth reading.

On a final note, if you have never lived in a communist country, if you have lived and you don't remember, or even if you  have spend most of your live under totalitarian regime, these two novels are worth reading. Depending on your moral codex they will astonish you, provoke you, amaze you, or angry you, but one thing is sure - they will not leave you disappointed or indifferent.