Orwell was a socialist. Maybe you knew that, maybe you didn’t. You’d certainly be forgiven for not knowing it. I find most of the people who bring him up nowadays are pretty far from socialism themselves, and so they superficially equate Orwell’s critiques of the Soviet Union in his two most famous works—1984 and Animal Farm—as somehow a condemnation of socialism itself. This might appear true as he was not afraid to critique the left (as in “Can Socialists Be Happy?”), but ’tis not so: I typically refer to The Road to Wigan Pier (my favourite work by Orwell) as his socialist manifesto since he very explicitly spells out his political views in the second part. Orwell is probably one of my favourite writers, particularly as an essayist (which is a part of his work that people often overlook).

Having said that, whenever someone has quoted Animal Farm at me, or even 1984, I’ve generally found it more irritating than not. Perhaps your experience will differ from mine, but I nonetheless consider the context in which quotes from Orwell emerge in today’s world and I find them superficial at best. Probably the best example of this is when Orwell is brought up in the context of discussion about the “threat against free speech” and the excesses of political correctness. For the contemporary right, this is Orwell’s enduring appeal, and to be fair it’s a fascinating aspect of his work. Really, it is the philosophy of language in 1984 that make it such a great read for me: the way in which the Party perverts the understanding—nay, the capacity to understand—of the people of Oceania is what is truly terrifying to me. I daresay that this is what has made me something of a literary anarchist: within the bounds of good taste and respect, I think people should say whatever they need to say to get their fucking point across. The richness of language can enhance our understanding and range of expression. Orwell taught me this.

However, the idea that Oceania parallels our modern society in all its politically correct in-glory is a facile comparison since it neglects the Party’s metaphysics that enable them to dilute the language and control thought accordingly. There are no Newspeak dictionaries in our society, nor is our government (perhaps to their dismay) anywhere near as effective at gaslighting as Ingsoc was. To put it another way, in our society, I might know the word ****** and its meaning, but that doesn’t mean that I should say it; but in the world of 1984, I would be unable to conceive of such a concept, as I would not even know the word! It’s worth noting, too, that we are not exempt from this peculiar metaphysic in our own society: there are plenty of things that we suppose must exist only because we have named them and agree that they do (e.g., stocks, money, etc.).

This is just one way that I think Orwell is a chronically misunderstood writer, and while there are more, I would say that they fall somewhere along the same lines. But my purpose is not to list every misconception I think people have; rather, I seek to remind readers that Orwell was not the apologist for today’s libertarian movement that he is sometimes made out to be, even to the scorn of his fellow leftists. Orwell was a man committed to economic justice in society, as any of his political essays would indicate, who could be fiercely critical even of his own “side”. He was a patriot, but he abhorred nationalism. He even fought against fascism! And so, it frustrates me to see his name sullied by some of its associations in the modern day. For while Orwell was by no means the perfect person, he was undoubtedly a thoughtful one, grounded in his socialist philosophy. So, would he have harsh words for the lefties of today? I have no doubt. However, neither do I doubt that he would picket alongside them nonetheless.

And my wish for him? Set him free from the partisan squabbles of today. For while one ought to appreciate and learn from him, Orwell is not one to allow himself claimed by anybody!