The Meaning of Standardized Testing

The Meaning of Standardized Testing

Each year, the non-profit organization the College Board, releases its most reputable standardized test for college bound aspirants, the SAT. The SAT exam which in the earlier years stood for the “Scholastic Aptitude Test” and then the “Scholastic Assessment Test” no longer stands for anything but is rather a dead acronym. Originally the standardized exam contained two sections which were simply Math and Verbal that ranged from a score of 200-800 totaling a maximum possible score of 1600. Later on in the years ahead, a third writing section which includes an essay was inserted increasing the total possible achievable score from 1600 to 2400. Many students who hope to enroll in prestigious top-notch universities including Harvard, Princeton, Yale, Stanford, MIT, and many others may often spend countless hours and months preparing rigorously before sitting for an exam session. The months following up may very well cause anxiousness and finally when the day comes, and their scores arrive reactions can vary tremendously from one individual to another.

Besides being one out of many factors in ultimately being admitted to a college, there have been many questions and debates regarding the SAT in general and what it means overall. Many have wondered for instance whether or not the SAT truly measures anything at all. Does the SAT measure innate intelligence? Does it measure academic achievement? Is it an accurate predictor of success in college overall? How much can one improve in standardized tests? Questions like these have been asked and debated for many years. Here I will present a variety of opinions on the SAT and will express my own.

According to Bob Schaeffer, Wayne Camara describes the SAT as a general attempt to measure a student’s “verbal and mathematical reasoning ability.” In relation to this idea, the more proficient one is at math and verbal skills, the higher they will score in comparison to the rest of the test takers. Now how much of it is truly reasoning ability? Perhaps no one can give an accurate percentage answer to that question but it is easily noticeable that the test has been given a meaningful title which is “SAT Reasoning Test.”

I remembered the times when I as a junior in high school scored a little above national average on the PSAT and improved about 300 points on my SAT exam to ultimately land in the 1900-2000 range. Upset and discouraged, I however wasn’t surprised since I prepared poorly for the exam and never or rarely scored above 600 on the critical reading section during my practice tests. Even more depressing was when one teacher who knew me very well as well as the SAT was thoroughly confident that I was going to score in the 2200 + (99 percentile) range. Was she right? Perhaps she was if I had prepared at least two years before I even took the SAT. Maybe if I had done something different I could have scored much higher on the exam. My consistent scoring of 5’s on the AP exams and solid scoring on the subject tests with little preparation (770 Math II, 730 Chemistry, 700 US History) clearly indicated that my SAT potential was a lot higher than I could have imagined. There was no doubt in my mind if I had prepared vigorously at least a year before I took any subject test, I would have almost certainly ended up with a perfect 800 on Math Level 2, perfect 800 on Chemistry, and most likely above a 750 on US History. Of all the sections I found the Critical Reading portion to be the most challenging and difficult to improve on especially since my English skills were hardly developed throughout my years of secondary education.

Getting a perfect SAT score (2400) is probably not realistic since most often it requires some luck. My view is that in order to greatly increase your chances is to start preparing for the exam as early as possible even ideally, 3 to 4 years before you even take the PSAT. That means that if one really wants to score in the very high 2300 range (2350-2400), one must start way back in middle school and begin reading and learning as much vocabulary as possible. Take as many practice tests as one can, ideally twenty or more and thus review each exam question thoroughly. Make sure your scores are ending up in the range that you desire.

Now an even more interesting question has been asked by some and even me. Is it possible for an average human with average or a little above average intelligence and with the right preparation and motivation earn a perfect score of 2400 on the SAT (800 Math, 800 Critical Reading, 800 Writing)? Can anyone or almost anyone score a 2400 or does it require some innate intelligence and luck? Let’s take a general look at what are statistically the odds of scoring a 2400 on the SAT exam. Each year nearly a million and a half college bound students sit down for 3 hours and 45 minutes of intense test taking. With the exam over, they wait nearly several weeks for their scores to be processed. Of the 1.5 million SAT test takers in 2008, about 5600 scored above a cumulative score of 2300. Beyond that, the numbers of higher scores decrease and thus only a small elite group of 300 or less students earn a perfect 2400. Keep in mind thought that it is possible to miss a few questions and still get a 2400. So in terms of probability the odds are approximately 1 out of 5000 that you will end up with a perfect SAT score.

So exactly what is the SAT a measure of? Here’s what the SAT means to me. From my experience and what the standardized test is all about, it seems that the SAT is an overall evaluation of a student’s developed mathematical, english (reading comprehension, vocabulary), and writing ability that have been systematically cultivated throughout twelve years of public education. It is no wonder that my math scores on the SAT greatly correlate with the rigorous preparation that I had as a child in the area of math. Only if I had done the exact same with the subject of english as well could I have seen a significant difference. Your math and verbal scores are an indication of how well your math and reading reasoning abilities have been developed and enhanced throughout the entire twelve years of secondary education you have received. If you’ve worked tremendously hard throughout the course of twelve years while perfecting your math and verbal abilities with self-motivation and perseverance, the higher your score will be on the SAT exam. If you’ve not, the greater chance will you have of pulling out an average score.

Opinions regarding the SAT have varied dramatically from one to another. I’ve gotten reactions ranging from it being a fair exam, to a difficult and arduous one, and to a very easy one in return. Most interesting was when one of my colleagues at Syracuse University who I described as a verbal virtuoso especially since he had read countless books and literature for many years assert how easy and simple the SAT exam was from his view. “The SAT was sooo easy!” said my friend who reportedly scored a 2270 or 2370 out of 2400 (don’t remember exact). I had never heard that kind of attitude from someone towards the SAT and it appears that it pretty much was. I have therefore realized that my critical reading and writing scores accurately reflected how advanced my english and verbal skills were. Therefore for this reason, I had formerly decided to start a new long journey for improving my english comprehension, grammar, and vocabulary skills to new levels and heights.

A Brief Memoir of Syracuse University

My Personal Experiences at Syracuse University

Upon graduating from Pittsford Mendon High School class of 2007, I was more than eager enough to go and attend the college that I had selected amongst the several that I was admitted upon graduating High School. Yet with 4 years of college flying by at a quick rate, I must say that time goes by fast. I still vividly remember the first rainy day when my parents drove me to Sadler Hall in late August of 2007. The traffic was great in numbers rendering a delay in arriving at our destination. The first year of college at Syracuse University was fun and exciting especially when I got to meet many new people amongst the campus and thus was a less stressful environment than many other ones amongst. Right nearby my dorm building Sadler Hall and Lawrinson lied the small environmental forest college of SUNY ESF. Founded nearly a hundred years ago in 1911, SUNY ESF was one of the smallest college campuses I had ever observed. Situated in an area traditionally known as “The Hill”, I occasionally perceived SUNY ESF as a satellite orbit of Syracuse University and more of a "moon rotating around the Earth" scenairo. I found the F. Franklin Moon Library to be intriguing and long in size when ventured on inside for the first time as a Junior. Even more interesting were the times when I would see students playing Humans vs Zombies out nearby the college. In all I have asserted that SUNY ESF (Environmental Science and Forestry) is an ideal college for those who are looking for a career in environmental science or that of conservation biology and ecology. I would therefore give SUNY ESF a rating of 5 out of 10 points.

Shifting focus back to Syracuse University, I found the campus to be somewhat small, ambivalent, peculiar, and at times quiet and dull. The Colleges were average and were nothing more interesting than a state university. I often would place Syracuse University more comparable to that of Penn State or Michigan State whatever you prefer. If you’re a student who’s interested in majoring in math, science, or engineering, I’d say Syracuse is probably not the best option for you. From my limited knowledge, the departments in the sciences, engineering, and mathematics are mediocre and nothing else. I would personally recommend Syracuse University for those who are more interested in majoring in the social sciences including but not limited to:
Psychology, Public Policy, Journalism, Business Management/Administration, Magazine Journalism, Television/Radio/Film, Marketing, Advertising, Broadcast/Digital Journalism, Graphic Design, Public Relations, Political Science (Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs), Finance, Economics, International Relations, Anthropology, Human Geography, Architecture, and any other non-math, science, or engineering related major. For those who are passionate about entering a career in management, I will say that the Whitman School of Management is a great option to be placed on a list of potential programs. For those who want a career in the field of engineering, I would rather suggest studying at a tech related institution such as RIT (Rochester Institute of Technology), Georgia Tech, MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology), Caltech, Michigan Tech University, etc.

Other than academics, the amount of students at the University is at least 20,000. Besides having a successful NCAA Basketball Team and being synonymous with the sport, Syracuse has a strong social scene. Behind the main campus site lies the neighborhood of apartment buildings where students either reside or are out on weekend nights partying and drinking at fraternity homes. I would on average go out and party with several of my friends no more than five times a semester. I came to discover that the fraternity homes were unclean and not a pleasant experience at all.

In conclusion, I would give Syracuse University an overall rating of 6 out of 10 points. If I was asked the question of whether or not I would attend Syracuse University again if I had to, I’d answer with a resounding no. If I could have, I would have attended a far better college in New York state or even out of state such as the University of Rochester, Cornell University, or even Ohio State University. In terms of academics, both the University of Rochester and Cornell University outrank Syracuse in many fields especially mathematics, science, and engineering. Ohio State University on the other hand would have a far greater social scene as I expect especially since the number of students who attend outnumber the amount at Syracuse University. If any of the majors I mentioned interest you, Syracuse would definitely be a great choice. Otherwise pick a different college or university to study at.

Yours Truly,

Faraz Mamaghani

Typing Speed Test (10 Fast Fingers)

Visit the Typing Test and try!

How many words per minute (wpm) can you type? Check it out and see for yourself!

1984 Literary Essay on Julia's Role in the Plot

The Corresponding Role of Julia in the Plot Development of 1984

            Furtive with a gleam of shyness at first sight, Julia takes on the role of a guardian-like figure for the narrative. Her existence typifies a mandatory bridge in the gap for the continuation of the story. At present she is often wit fully observed with a sense of scrutiny through the eyes of the protagonist Winston Smith who is overly suspicious of her essence. As the eventual lover of Winston, an essential comradeship is created that will render as a fundamental element of the plot. The connection between them would be revoked by betrayal which ultimately collates and culminates in the climactic moment of the novel that has been foreshadowed by occasional moments. Although initially mysterious and obscure in portrayal, Julia’s seemingly enigmatic character is progressively revealed to constitute a necessary component for the gradual development of the plot of 1984.

            Julia is first presented during Winston’s attendance at the two minutes hate assembly. The odious tension was apparent in that Winston “had disliked her from the very first moment of seeing her” (p.10). It would furthermore evolve to an incensement as he willingly desired to “flog her to death with a rubber truncheon” (p.15). The recurring moments of her subsequent unexpected appearances strikingly intimidates Winston for he becomes falsely convinced that she had been conspiring with the thought police. Depicted as the mysterious dark-haired girl, Julia epitomizes the fear of the unknown that Winston loathes and desires wrath upon. In fact, it is this thematic impression that predominates the earlier setting. The unknowingness of many concepts particularly the past is well reflected in Winston’s curiosity. What is realized is that Julia’s constant presence and misinterpreted intentions indirectly motivates Winston to learn and discover more of what he does not understand. He is therefore seen attempting to improve and widen his mere knowledge by interacting with a variety of individuals including a language specialist, Mr. Charrington, the owner of an antique shop, and even an elderly stranger. His quest for truth and understanding would approach a turning point once he began to discover who the unknown girl was.

As Winston was seeking answers to his questions, the serendipitous moment occurred when he learned of the unknown girl’s true friendliness. At one time the dark-haired girl clandestinely approached him and handed a note that romantically read “I love you” (p.108). From the moment onward, the plot’s direction had experienced a shift. Originally it would have been predicted that the girl was an antagonist as her lurking behavior seemed to have suggested. Since the note had expressed emphatic feelings towards the protagonist, the plot steers in a new route. It is then anticipated that the girl would come to be an ally of Winston who will act as a mentor in orchestrating events. Indeed the plot ventures on as foreseen by the introduction of the love note. The two became romantically involved with one another in private seclusion. Winston’s tireless thirst for knowledge was manifested in a series of questioning towards the young girl whose name was revealed to him as Julia. Having the fact unveiled that she had slept with “scores of men” within the Party, his passionate aggression and hatred towards the world in which he resided grew stronger. Such emotions are expressed in his admittance to Julia as he mutters “I hate purity, I hate goodness. I don’t want any virtue to exist anywhere. I want everyone to be corrupt to the bones” (p.125). Sharing a powerful similarity, Julia voluntarily decides to seduce him as she explains: “Well then, I out to suit you, dear. I’m corrupt to the bones” (p.125). Committing adulterly with Julia who embodies the corruption of the Party, Winston had surrendered his loyalty and dignity to the dominion that he had served. As Julia’s persona would drive Winston closer towards her, the more distant he would be apart from the Party.

            Aside from the growing camaraderie of the two, the fellowship will provide the tool for the narrative’s progression. A moment together foretells an upcoming scenario as Julia and her lover would “sometimes talked of engaging in active rebellion against the Party, but with no notion of how to take the first step” (p.152). Despite the strong connection between themselves, Julia would come to the conclusion that her ill-fated relationship will not endure. It was self-apparent as she lacked the interest that Winston had regarding the past and the next generation when she told him: “I’m not interested in the next generation, dear. I’m interested in us” (p.156). By confirming to not possessing the same motivation as Winston, Julia sets herself apart from him. The casual dichotomy that has been created amongst them bares forth a glimpse of the plot’s final revelation. Albeit the uncommonality, Julia had stirred Winston to contrive and conspire against what he had represented. In turn, she faithfully volunteers along with him to declare her opposition to the Party. Winston’s confession to O’Brien and desire to commit himself to antagonizing the Party is a central consequence of Julia’s seductive persona as he came to assert that “We believe that there is some kind of conspiracy, some kind of secret organization working against the Party, and that you are involved in it. We want to join it and work for it. We are enemies of the Party. We are though-criminals. We are also adulterers” (p.170). It is therefore proven from the words of Winston that Julia was a necessary force who indirectly prompted him to move further on from the first step. As he in the earlier moments of the novel dwindled in a state of confusion and uncertainty, Julia had come forth and had represented herself as a voice in the wilderness. Alternatively Winston would have more likely served the state, perpetually obeying the unchanging principles of the Party.  

            The real importance of Julia is understood in the moments leading up to the climax. With her lover Winston in captive, she was remotely kept separate from him. Deep within the interior of the Ministry of Love lied the gloomy cell which was delineated through the words of O’Brien as “the place where there is no darkness.”  Although gone from the moment, Julia had her influence intact as she would at times become the focus of Winston’s thoughts: “More dimly he thought of Julia. Somewhere or other she was suffering, perhaps far worse than he. She might be screaming with pain at this moment” (p.238). As she was not shown, it was unknown as to whether she was suffering the same agony and dreariness that her lover had been. Serving as his tormentor and perhaps worst nightmare, O’Brien went to every length possible to transform Winston from a hater to lover of Big Brother and all that the Party had stood for originally. As he succeeds in discovering the main source of Winston’s fear which are rats and placing him in Room 101 that was alluded to as the place that contains “the worst thing in the world” (p.283), O’Brien had fortuitously triumphed in forcing Winston to forfeit all the remaining feelings he had left of Julia. Unable to confront the greatest of his fears, Winston in the climactic moment frantically urges “Do it to Julia! Not me! Julia! I don’t care what you do to her. Tear her face off, strip her to the bones. Not me! Julia!” (p.286). In regards to the torture scene, Julia was more of a scapegoat to which Winston had access to in order to fend off his agony. Julia had in other words served as an elemental device for which Winston was provided to summon and use as a last resort

            From representing an unknown force that evokes fear, to the eventual lover and comrade of Winston, and to the main attributor of the climax, Julia is subsequently revealed to crucially format the plot structure of the storyline. Created as a radicalization to the traditional feminine girl marked by obedience and loyalty to an authority figure, Julia serves as a catalyst in stirring the passion that causes Winston to progress onwards. As their bond builds together, the framework of the plot is unveiled as they both could not stay together much longer. The bond between them is the sacrifice that is made by Winston himself and thus given to O’Brien. The plot’s finale would go as expected with Julia giving Winston the cold shoulder and remaining aloof in response to his betrayal. With the novel’s conclusion resulting in the two separate and distant from one another, it is noticed that a character like Julia was necessary for the novel’s events to be progressively linked towards one another in sequence.   

Works Cited

Orwell, George. 1984. New York: Signet Classics, 1977. 10, 15, 108, 125, 152, 156, 170, 238, 283, 286.

1984 Literary Analysis Essay on Newspeak

The Fundamental Purpose of Newspeak in 1984

            As the official language in George Orwell’s 1984, Newspeak with its unique linguistic style holds a dismal reputation. The interesting nature of Newspeak furtively invigorates a critical consequence to the mind of anyone who knows and speaks it natively. Characterized by a laconic and dynamic style, Newspeak contrives to consistently revive Doublethink or the action of mentally believing two contradictory ideas at once in order to inextricably possess the mind of its speakers. By dominating the psyche of its citizens, the colossal world of Oceania has been granted an everlasting existence that will be freed from inner threats of revolution or rebellion. The novel 1984 clearly illuminates the important function of Newspeak as it serves to construct the foundation for which Oceania depends upon. Above all, the objective role of Newspeak through the systematic manipulation of language is to reiterate the phenomenon of Doublethink in order to ultimately immortalize the totalitarian state of Oceania.

            The peculiarity of Newspeak is realized by the distinct linguistic characterization it carries. Unlike most other languages that expand and grow upon with the increment of new vocabulary, Newspeak unorthodoxly minimizes its lexicon by eliminating words that are deemed unnecessary. As a philologist who specializes in the language, Syme reveals to Winston Smith the current aim of Newspeak is in the action of “destroying words-scores of them, hundreds of them, every day. We’re cutting the language down to the bone.” (p.51). Syme sanguinely enjoys the process as it is evident in his own words: “It’s a beautiful thing, the destruction of words. Of course we use these forms already, but in the final version of Newspeak there’ll be nothing else. Don’t you see the beauty of that Winston?” (p.51). Winston Smith however expresses no sign of enthusiasm and is gravely aware of the dreary consequences of Newspeak. Naturally languages when left untouched advance onward and enlarge with words as newer ideas are put forward. Newspeak as seen in the conversational dialogue between Winston and Syme represents an archetypical antagonist to the evolution of language. As the sordid menace of Newspeak becomes noticeable to Winston, it is apparent that the shortening of a language by eradicating vocabulary reveals a deeper meaning. Language as it provides communication with one another is the fundamental essence of civilization. The diminishment of language as stimulated by Newspeak symbolizes an opposition to the progression of civilization. In order to invoke an affronting force, Newspeak supplements itself with the psychological weapon of Doublethink.

            When the superficial elements of the Newspeak are closely observed, the insidious intentions are revealed to be a consistent resurrection of the Doublethink phenomenon. Doublethink or the process of psychologically holding two contradictory facts as true is a central motif of George Orwell’s 1984 novel. The concept has been personified by the fictional party’s recurring slogan that contains the following three phases: “War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, and Ignorance is Strength” (p.26). As Newspeak is constantly eliminating words, the number of possible thoughts is simultaneously reduced. This renders as some sort of mind barrier since it stringently strives to prevent individuals from imagining rebellious thoughts. With human thought prolifically influenced by Newspeak, behavior is modified towards a manifestation of Doublethink. As one of the four major ministries in Oceania, the Ministry of Truth serves as an institution that manufactures a false sense of truth by deliberately demolishing historical records as a desperate attempt to erase the past forever. Other than its purpose to rewrite the course of history, the Ministry of Truth arms the Party with the weapon of Doublethink as a means to propagandize. Orwell abstractly delineates the motif of Doublethink in the following statement: “To know and not to know, to be conscious of complete truthfulness while telling carefully constructed lies, to hold simultaneously two opinions which cancelled out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them, consciously to induce unconsciousness, and then, once again, to become unconscious of the act of hypnosis you had just performed.” (p.35). The detailed description of Doublethink presents the view that dichotomies are merely contrived abstractions. It utilizes a philosophy that intends to hybridize the intrinsic duality of objective knowledge. Doublethink has been fabricated as a means to perceive the bipolarity of reality as a kind of illusion. Once such an illusion becomes hard pressed as fact, human thought transforms from a state of free inquiry to one of complete obedience. This paves the way for an ideology to arise and develop.

            Acting together in conjunction with one another, Newspeak and Doublethink bring forward the establishment of the totalitarianism that typifies Oceania. The essential roots that involve the altering of language and the instigation of psychological regulation inevitably leads to the birth of a political system. This specific fascist ideology coined by Orwell as Ingsoc is the sole political dominion in which the Party that presumes sovereignty over Oceania emphasizes. What Ingsoc demands is the absolute submission of its citizens in mental, physical, and moral terms. As an overwhelmingly complex system of mental manipulation, the ultimate goal of Ingsoc and its author the Party is foretold to Winston by his torturer and betrayer O’Brien.  

In the climactic scene where O’Brien confronts Winston, O’Brien arrogantly proclaims to Winston: “Do you begin to see, then, what kind of world we are creating? It is the exact opposite of the stupid hedonistic Utopias that the old reformers imagined. A world of fear and treachery and torment, a world of trampling and being trampled upon, a world which will grow not less but more merciless as it refines itself.” (p.267). The world that O’Brien mentions is one that is determined to suppress the rebellious potential that is innate within the mind of an individual. The fictional state of Oceania becomes an eternal omnipotent power that is essentially immune to revolution especially by the proletarians who make up nearly eighty-five percent of the population. O’Brien reassures this by explaining to Winston: “The proletarians will never revolt, not in a thousand years or a million. If you have ever cherished any dreams of violent insurrection, you must abandon them. There is no way in which the Party can be overthrown. The rule of the Party is forever” (p.261-262). Orwell clearly portrays O’Brien as a sordid citizen of Oceania and a genuine personification of what the Party idealizes. The words he utters to Winston evidently reflects the conspiracy he has committed with the Party. Winston who is well aware of the outcome of Oceania’s totalitarianism feels disdainful towards O’Brien’s apathetic and callous attitude. Besides initially being sensible of O’Brien’s insensitivity regarding the dystopia that he extols, what further concerns Winston is the catastrophic upshot of the tyranny imposed upon the dignity of the civilians.

            If the futuristic vision of O’Brien’s world were to become a reality the concepts of individuality and autonomy must be discarded. When Newspeak dominates the way the population thinks, feels, and acts by instilling Doublethink, people will no longer have a sense of personhood or identity. O’Brien clearly reflects to Winston the pending outcome of Oceania and ultimately Big Brother’s vision: “Children will be taken from their mothers at birth, as one takes eggs from a hen. Procreation will be an annual formality like the renewal of a ration card. There will be no loyalty, except loyalty toward the Party. There will be no love, except the love of Big Brother. If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face-forever” (p.267). The concept of a boot stamping on a human face as lauded by O’Brien symbolizes the destruction of individualism by the juggernaut force of totalitarianism. Revolutions uprising will be a movement of the past with little or no hope to come.

            The perpetual existence of Oceania is dependent upon the fabrication of language as a way to dominate the individual mind. With absolute eternal power over the individual, the timeless idea of identity and self breakdown and are vanquished. This situation has become a common trope of the dystopian genre of fictional literature. It should be noted that the time era in which this specific genre of literature arose was mainly during the rise of the Soviet Union and other totalitarian estates. Authors notably George Orwell have created works of fiction as a means of warning to readers about the deadly consequences of absolute power corrupted by the state with the abuse of language as a noteworthy example. Clearly 1984 portrays how a certain language like Newspeak can have potentially serious consequences that are not easily observable at first sight.

Works Cited

Orwell, George. 1984. New York: Signet Classics, 1977. 26, 35, 51, 261-2, 267.

1984 by George Orwell: An Introduction

George Orwell’s daunting vision of a dystopia has manifested in a literary masterpiece. With the title of 1984, Orwell envisioned a futuristic society where individuality and freedom are outdated and obsolete. Amongst the preeminent pieces of 20^th century literature, Orwell narrates the tale of an individual by the name of Winston Smith who as a member of the Outer Party, re-writes old newspaper articles in order to keep current news in line with the ideology of the Party that he serves. Based upon his experiences as a child and as an adult, Winston Smith despises virtually every aspect of the Party itself and imagines rebellion against Big Brother, the enigmatic dictator whose face personifies the totalitarianism that the Party and the sovereignty of Oceania stand for. Being a literary political fiction of the dystopian genre, Nineteen Eighty-Four has been deemed as a classic novel in terms of content, style, and themes. A plethora of the concepts it encompasses including Big Brother, doublethink, thoughtcrime, Newspeak, and memory hole have become a reputable lexicon ever since the book was published. The content of the literary work has given rise to the term Orwellian which signifies any form of deception, furtive surveillance, and historical manipulation in order to insidiously serve a totalitarian agenda of the nightmarish vision.