IDEOLOGICAL INTERPRETATIONS OF SOCIAL AND PERSONAL MOTIVES IN THE WORKS OF SAID AHMAD AND GEORGE ORWELL
;
totalitarianism, freedom, identity, morality, conformity, literature, power, symbolism.Abstrak
This article investigates the ideological interpretations of social and personal motives in the works of Said Ahmad and George Orwell. By analyzing Ahmad’s Ufq alongside Orwell’s Animal Farm and 1984, the study reveals how personal ambitions, ethical choices, and collective responsibilities are shaped by ideological constraints. Ahmad illustrates the silent struggles of Uzbek individuals under Soviet influence, where social motives often clash with personal integrity. Orwell, conversely, presents a broader critique of authoritarian regimes, portraying how ideology transforms human motives into instruments of control and manipulation. The comparative approach underscores the universal patterns of conformity, resistance, and moral compromise in literature. Furthermore, it demonstrates how writers from distinct contexts employ narrative strategies to uncover the consequences of ideology on both society and individual behavior. These insights emphasize the role of literature in interrogating power and safeguarding human dignity.
Iqtiboslar
Ahmad, S. (2019). Qutlug‘ qon. Tashkent: G‘afur G‘ulom Publishing, pp. 74–119.
Orwell, G. (1945). Animal Farm. London: Secker & Warburg, pp. 23–89.
Orwell, G. (2000). Collected Essays, Journalism and Letters. London: Penguin, pp. 152–167.
Alimova, N. (2015). Sovet davri o‘zbek adabiyotida ijtimoiy motivlar. Tashkent: Fan va Texnologiya, pp. 45–66.
Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. New York: Pantheon Books, pp. 135–182.
Jameson, F. (2002). The Political Unconscious: Narrative as a Socially Symbolic Act. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, pp. 59–101.
Boym, S. (2001). The Future of Nostalgia. New York: Basic Books, pp. 207–240.
