religion, for that is illiberal; we must not talk about bread
and cheese, for that is talking shop. ( NNH, p. 149)

Oceania also suffers from a lack of liberty, including the loss of free-
dom of speech, as is evidenced by the constant chatter concerning the
lottery. The Thought police, moreover, enforce great suppression, but
the effects in both societies are essentially the saw: the people do
not know enough to realize their predicament. As Kierkegaard often em-
phasized, the only thing worse than being lost is being lost and not
knowing one is lost. Orwell asserts this truth in "Toward European
Unity," where he writes: "The greatest difficulty of all is the apathy
and conservatism of people everywhere."

Both Adam Wayne and Winston Smith became distinguished in their ef-
forts to rise above this state of apathy -- Wayne by lifting his sword;
Smith, his pen. It is fitting that Winston Smith resorts to the isolated
act of writing a diary instead of urging revolution among the proles.
They knew so little history and so much propaganda that the likelihood of
a prole-based revolution was as slim as the possibilty that Winston Smith
would obtain a satisfactory answer from the old man in the pub. Whereas
apathy in Orwell's book results primarily from ignorance, in Chesterton's
book it results in belief in social evolution. People felt that if they
must change, they must "'change slowly and safely, as the animals do'"
( NNH, p. 21). It is noteworthy that Wayne, who resorts to violent means,
succeeds in altering the spirit of the age, whereas Smith, who only con-
templates the use of violence, fails altogether.

Winston Smith's inertia may partly result from Orwell's disdain of
Chesterton's apparent delight in bloodshed. Chesterton easily lets his
characters die, as in the following instance: "'The banner of Notting
Hill stoops to a hero,' and with the words he drove the spear-point and
half the flag-staff through Lambert's body and dropped him dead upon the
road below, a stone upon the stones of the street" ( NNH, p. 243). yet
armed with knowledge of Chesterton's gentle temperament, a sympathetic
reader understands that fighting is symbolic of caring. After battling,
Adam Wayne sincerely exclaims, "'We have won. . . . We have taught our
enemies patriotism!'"( NNH, p. 243) It was better, according to Chester-
ton, for one to lose a limb than for one's whole mind to be cast into
hell. Orwell, though, lacked the sympathy to read Chesterton's use of
violence as an expression of human decency. His antipathy toward the un-
restrained shedding of blood by Chesterton's heroes perhaps contributed
to his portrayal of Winston Smith's revolutionary impotence. Orwell en-
dowed the Party with the monopoly of power, as is evident by the inquisi-
torial nature of the tortures Smith received, thereby ensuring the book's
fatalistic conclusion.

In allowing Winston Smith to fail, Orwell departed not only from
Chesterton's symbolism and plot but also from the latter's metaphysical
suppositions. Smith foresees his doom from the beginning because his
entire world is against him -- from the neighborhood children to the
Thought Police. only Tulia supports him as a person. Wayne, on the
other hand, realizes his hope because transcendental powers assist him.
The book ends with him walking off into the twilight of some cosmic
afterlife.

on the surface the conclusion of Nineteen Eighty-Four appears to be
much more believable than that of The Napoleon of Notting Hill, yet Nine-
teen Eighty-Four is so dependent on causality that once a reader detects
a fault in the sequence, the entire vision is rendered unbelievable. Be-
ing structured around the syllogism that (1) no individuality can exist
with the Party; (2) Winston Smith becomes an individual; (3) therefore,
Winston Smith ceases to exist, Nineteen Eighty-Four is only as credible
as its major premise. The Napoleon of Notting Hill is fantastic from the
start (with such phrases as "When the curtain goes up on this sto-

-6-