Comparative Study Of George Orwell’s And Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s Critical Works Of Totalitarianism

Goodness in life and love of literature and a long training on writing made GeorgeOrwell (1903-1950) could demonstrate his understanding of Totalitarianism innear-perfect writing. Orwell’s oeuvre especially the two crowning works he completedin the last years of his life showing his love of writing and that he did not write onlyfor the writing’s sake. From the point of goodness Orwell observed and studiedtotalitarianism and wrote it down for the purpose of complaints and exposing andwarning. Orwell volunteered for the war in Spain and was shot in the throat whichnearly killed him and this ended his Spanish experience. The Spain’s situation is it ison the outer edge of the totalitarianism, gave Orwell who lived in relatively democraticEurope an unique perspective, which made him could calmly stand in an Europe’smore open and more democratic stance to observe and examine totalitarianism, andalso made him could spy on the truth which was covered up to the Western democraticworld by the totalitarianism. Therefore, unlike contemporary writer AlexanderSolzhenitsyn (1918-2008), who experienced the misery of the Soviet GulagArchipelago himself. Orwell’s works were more abstract, more extensive and morefables and also more elegant. In addition to totalitarianism, Orwell’s glorious shiningdeep thinking and concerns of human nature between the lines and conscience, is alsoan important theme in his work. Although Orwell’s works were abstract but it is hispersonal emotional experience. His works shows the limitations of the helplessness ofthe contradictions in his character and his era. Obviously, he is in written politics withliterature. To read his works is largely equal to reading traditional novels.Solzhenitsyn’s works after the work One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich werelike written by a different person who almost ignored the literary nature. Solzhenitsynwas originally a na ve and insufferably arrogant aristocrat. In letter, he insulted FatherStalin and was arrested suddenly for this. He becomes a person imprisoned in theGulag Archipelago, a man with insight. And he has become concern about hundreds ofthousands of labor camp’s sons and the dark of the Soviet Union. Almost all of hisworks are for the purpose of attacking the Soviet Union under Stalin, His works gives us the impression that as if his conscience, indignation and disclosure cannot wait anylonger that he ignored to take the scrutiny writing. That the work One Day in the Lifeof Ivan Denisovich’s literary achievements than almost all of his other works nowherenear the documentary, accusing expose achievements. Compared to Orwell, he is morelike use literature to write politics. Readers are like read the tragic news reports.These two writers used their thin personal voice with all their strength to resisttotalitarianism and against the biggest lie of their time, against inhuman cruelty, andagainst unavoidable holocaust. While if we say that Solzhenitsyn made Western worldstand outside the totalitarianism, like watching a brutal film watching the burden oftotalitarianism in the Soviet Union under Stalin. In the end, the audience perceptionswas only that they are in a safe world to see another world which was outdated,dangerous and cruel in the democratic process, and what they would give to the worldwas only the sympathy and indignation of an onlooker. That we can say that theabstract but realistic "Dystopian" which built by Orwell make the entire Western world,and the so self-righteous human spirit trembling and uneasy for unique terror oftotalitarianism and feel deep shame and terror for themselves’ falling.