Skip to navigation – Site map

HomeIssues18VariaOrwell’s Legacy in Years and Year...

Varia

Orwell’s Legacy in Years and Years (Russell T. Davies, 2019)

Anne-Lise Marin-Lamellet

Abstracts

The UK has regularly produced films and series that are resonant with some aspects of Nineteen Eighty-Four whatever their genre (science-fiction, horror, thriller, drama). However, one of the most recent and comprehensive tributes to and updates on Orwell’s famous dystopia is probably Russell T. Davies’s miniseries Years and Years (2019). Set in a post-Brexit Britain, it follows an average “Middle England” family from Manchester over the course of a decade of turmoil starting in 2019 and can be seen as a prequel to Orwell’s book. Oceania’s guiding principles are looming in a sort of Big Brother’s world in the making (with omnipresent screens, artificial intelligence and biotechnology) in which all the preconditions for a totalitarian regime to take over the UK are already in place. Populist leaders resort to Newspeak euphemisms to obfuscate the harsh reality of their policies and only common decency can be pitted against them. Like its unavowed model, the miniseries serves as a wake-up call for technophile, numbed 21st century audiences since its conclusion is that it is up to citizens to reclaim and keep control over the past, the present and the future to ensure the survival of democratic institutions.

Top of page

Full text

Introduction

  • 1 All translations in the body text from articles originally written in French are mine.

1The UK has regularly produced films and series that are resonant with some aspects of Nineteen Eighty-Four (1949), a novel which, although “by no means the only, or even the first, dystopian novel, […] has become the quintessential articulation of dystopian ideas” (Bitel 2022). Ranging from the usually expected genres such as science-fiction and horror (Children of Men, V for Vendetta, Black Mirror, Doomsday) to more social-realistic modes of storytelling such as political satires, thrillers and dramas (A Very British Coup, State of Play, In the Loop, The Thick of It, Closed Circuit, Red Road), these films and series extrapolate from advanced information technologies and the rise of CCTV as well as politicians’ obsession with “spin” and soundbites aka Newspeak. “Orwellian” may sound like a hackneyed phrase being “the most widely used adjective derived from the name of a modern writer” (Nunberg 2003). However, one of the most recent and comprehensive tributes to and update on Orwell’s famous dystopia is probably Russell T. Davies’s miniseries Years and Years, whose six episodes were first aired on BBC One in May/June 2019. Reviews have often compared it to Black Mirror because of its focus on technology although it is by no means a techno dystopia (D’Addario 2019; Franquebalme 2019; Langlais 2019b; Soligny 2019; Tallerico 2019) while the cast named it a crossover between the latter and Our Friends in the North (Martin 2019; Cook 2019), another miniseries (Peter Flannery, BBC2, 1996) that also examined the political and social changes affecting the UK but this time between the 1960s and the 1990s through a group of four friends. The reason for what may look like an odd generic mix is probably because Years and Years’s general aesthetic is that of a standard sitcom following an average “Middle England” family from Manchester over the course of a decade of turmoil starting in a 2019 post-Brexit Britain. This anticipatory dimension of a world that is collapsing or, in Russell T. Davies’s own words, “a drama about our civilisation sliding” (Turchiano 2019) is certainly why almost every review mentioned the word “dystopia” at the time (D’Addario 2019; Langlais 2019a; MacInnes 2019; Nussbaum 2019; O’Grady 2019a, Poniewozik 2019), a term to be understood as “the systemising, magnifying and projection into the future of a society’s current characteristics perceived to be potentially threatening” (Claisse 2010).1

2Interestingly though, only three scholars have explicitly referred to Orwell, albeit incidentally, since then (Cook 2019; Faure and Taïeb 2022). The writer himself has never mentioned a potential connection with Nineteen Eighty-Four. Yet, in spite of its inclusion of updated issues such as the dire consequences of global warming, this “realistic near future dystopia” (Franquebalme 2019) owes so much to Orwell’s book in terms of themes and characters that it could almost be seen as its prequel. The question here is not about some form of “novel” or “narrative expansion” per se (Parey 2019a: 1-24) since the miniseries has by all accounts not been conceived in relation to the world of Nineteen Eighty-Four intentionally, contrary to 2084 (Boualem Sansal, 2015) for example, that is, in its very title, intent and ideology (Fieu 2017) a sequel to Orwell’s book. The fact remains that the miniseries appears to be intertextually and intermedially tied to what may be regarded as its source-text. These six episodes offering a linear, though somewhat jolty, timeline have much more in common with Nineteen Eighty-Four than a mere “Orwellian drift” in their depiction of a “totalitarian perspective” (Faure and Taïeb 2022). In a current world that is seen as reaching a tipping point, each episode is like another step towards a final destination that is the society described in Nineteen Eighty-Four. As such, the miniseries matches Genette’s definition of a prequel as an “analeptic continuation” (Genette 1997: 177) in that Years and Years does look like an origin story providing some clarification as to how such a system could emerge. That is all the more intriguing since Orwell showed how dystopian societies often work hard to erase any contradictory evidence in their will to obfuscate how they came about. Years and Years does seem to reconstruct the past (Parey 2019b) of Nineteen Eighty-Four and that diegetic past happens to be the viewer’s present, with all the implications this entails. Therefore, as odd as it may sound, the miniseries uses Orwell’s novel unwittingly as a “heuristic potential” (Rumpala 2010 and 2015) so that “that nameless future” (Faure and Taïeb 2022) that it paves the way for does not eventually get called Nineteen Eighty-Four.

  • 2 Faure and Taïeb (2022), in line with Russell T. Davies, mention a “glissement vers la dystopie”.

3This article thus aims to provide a close reading of the miniseries to show how a variety of troubling details relate to Orwell’s magnum opus in its most intimate core. The semantic, spatial, temporal, narrative and discursive elements they both rely on cannot but lead one to think they constitute the dialectic of variable/invariable elements and common matrix that a prequel and its source-text share (Parey 2019b). As its unavowed/unintentional prequel, the society described in Years and Years could indeed be the world remembered or imagined by Winston in his diary, his dreams and his memories. With its omnipresent screens, artificial intelligence devices and biotechnology, as well as its increasingly authoritarian populist leaders, it ticks all the boxes of Big Brother’s world in-the-making, showing how the preconditions for a true totalitarian regime to take over the UK are already in place. Although they are not actually used in the miniseries, Oceania’s Party slogans (Freedom is Slavery, War is Peace, Ignorance is Strength) prove to be the guidelines that already govern this world gradually shifting towards dystopia,2 and only common decency, another Orwellian concept, may avert the perpetuation of dictatorship. With its combination of mundane family life scenes and sociopolitical projections, the miniseries in keeping with its dystopian dimension conjures up a “future perfect” (Claisse 2010) to better try and ward it off, which might explain its ambivalent ending.

“Freedom is Slavery”

  • 3 This quote is taken from the speech Vivienne Rook makes when she gets appointed as Prime Minister, (...)
  • 4 In episode four, Daniel tries to reassure Viktor that the police and immigration services never com (...)

4The miniseries starts in 2019 in a world that is both very familiar to contemporary spectators and oddly resonant with that of Nineteen Eighty-Four. According to the regular newsreels shown, the world order seems to be based on three big areas – the US and UK (before the latter “stands alone in the world”3 in episode five), Europe and Russia, and China – in other words what will become Oceania, Eurasia and Eastasia (Orwell 1989: 193). The Cold War and the Empire that made up the background of Orwell’s time of writing are no longer directly relevant but little has changed in the end. British citizens can distractedly watch the news coming from (not so) faraway illiberal regimes or soft dictatorships (e.g. Ukraine) before going back to their barbecue (episode three), being quite content to be safe at home,4 able to enjoy their basic freedoms as the camera offers a street view that highlights the archetypal Englishness of the suburban landscape (episode one, 16’). It is true that, by comparison, the UK seems to have reached a perfect state of bliss and tolerance. The Lyons family – the onomastics suggests they stand for the English every man/woman (just like Winston Smith in Orwell’s novel) – are a multicultural, gay-friendly, gender-fluid, cross-class micro-society in which generations coexist peacefully and accept diverging lifestyles and political views.

  • 5 The word “reminiscent” is used a few times in this article although, as explained, Nineteen Eighty- (...)

5They do not seem to realise that the freedom they enjoy is illusory. Technological progress and the ever-increasing digitalisation of daily life seem widely accepted. Only when younger generations come out with their plan to go “trans” (human) do parents briefly worry over the future of humankind and society. In its most technological utopian moments, Years and Years presents positive aspects such as medical breakthroughs. However, as in Orwell’s book, most of the technology shown “can in some way [already] be used for the diminution of human liberty” (Orwell 1989: 201). Surveillance capitalism (Zuboff 2019) is everywhere. CCTV, laptops, tablets, smartphones are ubiquitous. Some establishing shots of Manchester and London present a bird’s eye view that reinforces the impression of someone watching, just like recurrent high-angle shots of interiors (as if a camera were filming from a corner of the room or above the furniture). New devices use artificial intelligence, like “Signor”, a sort of Siri/Alexa-like personal assistant in an aluminium tube that stands proudly in every room and is the closest precursor to the Orwellian “telescreen.” When the latest generation of the device becomes intangible (“the signal’s in the air, in the wires, in the walls,” episode six), one can assume that as people “can speak out loud anywhere,” they can also be heard or listened to. In its quest to “extinguish once and for all the possibility of independent thought [and] discover, against his will, what another human being is thinking” (Orwell 1989: 201), the government sponsors young girls like Bethany to undergo regular “upgrades,” i.e. operations to “integrate” (meaning implant) technology within their bodies (episode five). In exchange, these enhanced/augmented creatures work in data mining, for example as “data sweepers to monitor Russian interference” (episode three), reminiscent5 of both the work of the employees of the Ministry of Truth and recent scandals such as Cambridge Analytica (Sich, Bullock and Roberts 2019). The atmosphere in Bethany’s workplace may look employee-friendly but freedom is quite limited for people that are literally “owned” by the government (the word is used in episodes five and six). At the end of the miniseries (episode five), Bethany is O’Brien’s wildest dream (Orwell 1989: 174, 201), an eye/camera, thumb/earpiece, little finger/microphone, wafer-implanted brain sort of cyborg whose thoughts can be predicted if not read. She can also record and store all information, get access to anyone’s files and thereby opinions. She and her colleagues may “declare independence” (episode six), the fact is they remain literally wired up and enslaved as is implied by her father’s use of the word “indentured” when he regrets not being able to pay for her operation himself so that she would not belong to the government (episode five).

6The freedom that is forcefully promised by politicians (episode five) also comes with its deception since it is mostly economic liberalism that is on the agenda. In times of automation, digitalisation and financialisation, many British citizens face no alternative but to turn towards the “gig economy” (a labour market characterised by the prevalence of short-term contracts or freelance work), and therefore a lifetime of cumulated precarious jobs, waiting for some new cheap software to replace them overnight (Celeste loses her job as an accountant, Stephen as a financial adviser, Rosie as a school chef). Euphemisms may be used in this “gig economy” but the fact is labour market regulations become increasingly brutal. Stephen is told he is not to call himself a bicycle courier but a “lifestyle enhancer” because he makes his clients’ “life better.” His pay remains abysmally low and his working conditions harrowing. Now and again, innovations presented by politicians as progress turn against the latter. When a giant drone supposed to deliver parcels decapitates the MP proudly promoting the Northern Powerhouse Drone Park (episode two), the incident seems to be some form of retribution for the lies he proffered on television (“one job lost, one job gained”). Public-private partnerships are also a way for investors to own former public sectors. Vijay and Daniel who work for Council housing realise they are now the property of Stonerock Holdings (episode two).

7This context proves ripe for the rise of populist figures. The point of the miniseries is to show how freedom and democracy die in a slow process of self-destruction and, as a prequel, to envision how a figure such as Big Brother may emerge. Years and Years thus portrays the progressive but irresistible rise of entrepreneur Vivienne Rook, a character seemingly based on Katie Hopkins (Mangan 2019) but who can also be viewed as a physical and ideological crossbreed of Boris Johnson (Cook 2019; D’Addario 2019; Franquebalme 2019; Langlais 2019a; Soligny 2019), Nigel Farage (MacInnes 2019; Mangan 2019; O’Grady 2019a), Donald Trump (D’Addario 2019; Langlais 2019a; Soligny 2019; Tallerico 2019) and Marine Le Pen (Franquebalme 2019; Langlais 2019a; Soligny 2019). Rook is the first character to appear on screen (a choice made recurrently in the following episodes), as she talks on television and the camera zooms in on her face to foreshadow her rise to power. That endeavour may not be a bed of roses but her tenacity facing electoral disappointments also echoes The Terminator (James Cameron, 1984), the android from whom she borrows her resilience and her favourite gimmick, “I’ll be back.” “You watch me,” she says and she indeed becomes omnipresent on all types of media (television, tablets, smartphones) as shown in episode one (40’). When she gets elected as an MP, she seems to invade screens. Muriel switches off her television set but the sequence of images goes to another live screen that shows Rook’s exhilaration as if to better signify her unavoidable presence. Soon to be simply referred to as Viv, she presents the lineaments of Big Brother whose face is everywhere and piercing eyes are plunging into those of the onlooker or viewer as she regularly breaks the fourth wall on television to establish a more direct link with her audience/voters. The “Vote Viv” slogan seen on giant digital billboards or campaign buses (episode two) and the chanting of “Viv!” (episode one) foreshadow that of “BB” (Orwell 1989: 18), relying on another powerful alliteration to mesmerise supporters, typical of Newspeak in which “euphony outweigh[s] every consideration other than exactitude of meaning” (Orwell 1989: 321). She ends up being appointed Prime Minister (episode four) and city buildings get covered with giant posters all starting with “Viv says” followed by the motto of the day (episode five).

  • 6 There might also be a nod to the Italian Five Star Movement and the fact that she opens her own cha (...)

8However, just as in Orwell’s novel, Vivienne Rook is in the end simply the face and “embodiment” (Orwell 1989: 272) of the (Four Star) Party she officially founded after the infamous interview that shot her to fame as she used a four-letter word to say how little she cared about the Israel/Palestine conflict.6 She performs the same role as Big Brother which is to be “the guise in which the Party chooses to exhibit itself to the world. [Her] function is to act as a focusing point for love, fear and reverence, emotions which are more easily felt towards an individual than towards an organisation.” (Orwell 1989: 217) But “the priests of power” (Orwell 1989: 276), the group of Inner Party members, called “the oligarchy” in Nineteen Eighty-Four (Orwell 1989: 218), who use her as a puppet, remain unseen. These men in grey suits are reminiscent of another Orwellian reference, “them”, which is to be found both in Nineteen Eighty-Four (Orwell 1989: 128, 137, 174) and in his essay The Road to Wigan Pier: “Who were ‘they’? I asked. Nobody seemed to know; but evidently ‘they’ were omnipotent.” (Orwell 1967: 43-4) Just like the hop-pickers that were too scared of their employers to form a union, the power of those who employ Rook is so big that even she is terrified and sternly muses on the impossibility to escape and vanish by the time she has become Prime Minister, a pseudo position of power with very little freedom of action (“If I could, I’d go. […] Imagine if I did. They’d kill me. They would have me killed.”). The word is also regularly used by some of the Lyons family, notably Celeste and Edith (episode six), and gets tainted with conspiracy theories because of the impossibility to clearly define it.

9Years and Years thus presents a society in which a certain number of blocks are already in place to pave the way to Nineteen Eighty-Four. Ironically, in a country that officially champions the cause of freedom (started with Brexit), no one is free since the conjunction of surveillance capitalism and the “gig” economy born out of ultraliberalism hold in subjection whole sections of the population that soon become a new enemy within.

“War is Peace”

10The world depicted by Years and Years also heralds the state of continuous or permanent war featured in Nineteen Eighty-Four that can therefore change its character and become a kind of peace as explained in Goldstein’s book:

In past ages, a war, almost by definition, was something that sooner or later came to an end, usually in unmistakable victory or defeat. […] But when war becomes literally continuous, it also ceases to be dangerous. […] The very word ‘war’, therefore, has become misleading. It would probably be accurate to say that by becoming continuous war has ceased to exist. […] A peace that was truly permanent would be the same as a permanent war. (Orwell 1989: 205-8)

  • 7 The love/hate relationship the two superpowers nourish is reminiscent of the fake war manoeuvres de (...)

11With “conflicts of limited aims, involving very small numbers of people, mostly highly-trained specialists, [causing] comparatively few casualties, [taking] place on the vague frontiers whose whereabouts the average man can only guess at” (Orwell 1989: 194), war, in Years in Years, is the never-ending backdrop of all news channels, whether it involves the Sino-American escalation of tension that ends up in the firing of a nuclear missile on the artificial island of Hong Sha,7 the suspected manipulation and cyberwarfare led by Russian hackers, the mounting riots and chaos sweeping over Europe as the European Union seems to be at the end of its tether (episode four). Except for an emergency broadcast and siren reminiscent of the Blitz at the end of episode one, which the Lyonses first think is a hoax, war does not seem to have any bearing on viewers/citizens’ daily lives. It can therefore become unreal “but though it is unreal it is not meaningless” (Orwell 1989: 207) and permanent war can become something much closer to home as terrorist attacks using dirty bombs are perpetrated on the British mainland.

  • 8 Real chocolate is also a luxury in the book and can only be obtained thanks to black market (127-8) (...)
  • 9 When Stephens meets her by chance, he tries to start a casual conversation with her and thinks he w (...)

12But whether war is fought in faraway places or on homeland, what matters is not so much the war itself but the psychological state it generates to be used by rising authoritarian leaders. As explained in Nineteen Eighty-Four, “all that is needed is that a state of war should exist.” (Orwell 1989: 200) In the miniseries, Rook theatrically sympathises with soldiers’ widows who criticise the war but she nonetheless regularly shows bouts of “primitive patriotism.” (Orwell 1989: 75) War is a useful tool for politicians to make up for economic failure. In Nineteen Eighty-Four, continuous warfare becomes an end in itself for an economic system that seeks “to keep the structure of society intact” (Orwell 1989: 207) because “a society could not long remain stable [should] wealth be evenly distributed, while power remained in the hands of a small privileged caste. […] Goods must be produced, but they must not be distributed. And in practice the only way of achieving this [is] by continuous warfare.” (Orwell 1989: 197-8, original emphasis) In Years and Years, inequalities widen as austerity policies become structural due to the repetitive crises of the neoliberal global economy. Being part of the “squeezed middle” that sees its living conditions deteriorate, Stephen quickly realises that “we [i.e. his family] are not on the good side.” As in Orwell’s book, “even the favoured groups [are kept] somewhere near the brink of hardship” (Orwell 1989, 199) and Stephen can see the difference in lifestyle between his clients and him, “the importance of small privileges [magnifying] the distinction between one group and another.” (Orwell 1989, 199) Increasingly angry and frustrated, Stephen is looking for scapegoats, ready to do whatever it takes to be part of that circle of happy few. As in Nineteen Eighty-Four, the need for an enemy remains vital, be it to account for energy shortages resulting in general blackouts, or for food scarcity, as bananas or chocolate become luxuries, just like razor blades in the book.8 An easy way out is to “blame it on the Russians,” a perfect illustration of the government’s Orwellian “doublethink” since Rook privately shows Stephen she knows better (episode five),9 although the miniseries does not provide a strict equivalent of Goldstein and the Two Minutes Hate.

  • 10 Faure and Taïeb (2022) think the deictic is proof that representations of totalitarian regimes in d (...)
  • 11 The BNP’s 2010 manifesto claimed that “Britain [was] full” (BBC 2010).

13Because the society that Years and Years depicts is not a full-on dystopia yet, continuous war takes on a much more social meaning in a country that is maintained in a state of permanent recession owing to both a banking crisis and global warming. The new regime that some may call soft fascism cannot only count on foreign threats and thus turns to enemies within. Class war starts raging. As in Nineteen Eighty-Four, the UK in Years and Years is divided into increasingly closed communities, and both the public and the private sectors resort to euphemisms to obfuscate the harsh reality of their policies, notably concerning undesirable citizens/denizens. They take their inspiration from the Ukrainian government whose “rehousing” policy is actually a purge, as alluded to in episodes one and four. The Ministries of Peace and Plenty are taking shape in Rook’s property and private security companies that thrive on the pauperisation of British society. While the rich elitist boroughs of Central London, like Kensington, establish gated communities and means-tests (episodes one and four), the homeless, asylum seekers, and finally all working-class people become fenced in their estates, sealed off from the rest of the country and criminalised (episodes five and six). Undocumented migrants are sent to Erstwhile Sites. Officially, they owe their name to the fact that most are former army bases but in fact probably because, once there, the migrants are dehumanised or no longer human, like the “unpersons” mentioned by Winston (Orwell 1989: 48, 164).10 They are “disappeared” just as suspected dissidents are “vaporised” in the book (Orwell 1989: 21, 153). In other words, Rook and her government are carrying out a policy of social/ethnic cleansing (MacInnes 2019) and these so-called facilities are concentration camps – this British invention during the Boer War has been misunderstood according to Rook (like the word “genocide,” episode five). On these sites that look like Nazi camps (the watchtowers are actually “blink” towers i.e. signal blockers), there are no torture chambers such as Room 101 but the way migrants are being treated is deleterious. They are left to fend for themselves as monkey flu intentionally spreads with the arrival of infected people. “Let nature take its course” in the words of the Prime Minister, a policy one might relate to the concept of herd immunity versus the coronavirus (Merrick 2020). The method used might not be as brutal as in Nineteen Eighty-Four – “how to kill several hundred million people in a few seconds without giving warning beforehand” (Orwell 1989: 201) –, but the ideological undertone is clear. The night during which she discusses the ways and means of disposing of all the undesirable with carefully selected private bidders echoes the Final Solution (also because of the place chosen, a lavish manor house reminiscent of the Wannsee Conference) and some of the slogans of British far-right parties, like the BNP (“we’re full,” she says in episode five).11

  • 12 The trucks that transport them announce the war prisoner convoys described by Orwell (121-2), peopl (...)

14Rook might put forward her northern accent to appear as an anti-establishment figure, but the North/South divide keeps widening judging by the locations chosen for the Erstwhile Sites briefly visible on a map. Outcasts are rejected away from sight, in the Midlands and the North (a brief mention of a Scottish site is also made in episode six). Away from sight also because the transportation of migrants usually takes place at night.12 A permanent social war is thus ripping the UK apart, enabling populist and authoritarian regimes to present themselves as the last resort, a political system that reaches its completion in Nineteen Eighty-Four.

“Ignorance is Strength”

15Years and Years is also a world in which the domination of one or two classes by another can only be maintained by institutions whose role is to ensure the maintenance of a fixed social order, possibly by fooling the majority into thinking they share a consensus of views (Orwell 1989: 218) with the minority that governs them whereas “the aims of these three groups [the High, the Middle and the Low, editor’s note] are entirely irreconcilable.” (Orwell 1989: 210) This level of consent of the general public could of course not be possible without the active participation of the media, especially news channels that already appear as the main providers of “prolefeed,” “the rubbishy entertainment and spurious news […] handed out to the masses” (Orwell 1989: 320), and Newspeak, “designed not to extend but to diminish the range of thought […] by cutting the choice of words down to a minimum” (Orwell 1989: 313, original emphasis), delivered twenty-four seven through a variety of telescreens.

  • 13 Her charity cause for a game entitled “pointless” is to build a statue for all the horses killed in (...)

16Television and social media feast on quips and jibes that they then turn into soundbites so it is not surprising that they act as a showcase for witty, sharp-tongued candidates. The distinction between comedian/clown and politician tends to get blurred as television debates, just like chat-shows, become a pure source of entertainment for the general public. Rook becomes famous for her shocking or eccentric stances.13 She is said to be an “odd cross between Theresa May and Victoria Wood” (O’Grady 2019b) and quotes the comedian herself (episode five). Infotainment soon gives way to soft power/propaganda as Rook refuses to appear on any terrestrial network (episode three), opens her own channel, and finally shuts down the BBC (episode six). The miniseries makes it clear that she is a creature of the media. Even though she complains of the censorship she has faced from “the fake news media,” she proudly holds her first Daily Mirror front-page when she launches her new party (episode one) and, throughout the miniseries, she almost always appears in embedded screens, which also stresses the fascination she creates, just like Big Brother’s eyes and Mona Lisa’s smile. Daniel and Rosie keep calling her a “monster” or “horrific” yet the latter votes for her. The way she is shot on her own channel standing in the middle of her pundits, all looking up to her, at a large table makes the scene look like the Last Supper and therefore depicts her as a new messiah (episode three, 36’). All news channels show how partial they are to such candidates. On some newsreels, Rook is said to respond to “unfair attacks” as if that was a factual headline while it is a biased comment (episode six).

17Populist leaders such as Rook make a point of using colloquial abbreviations to sound more approachable (“a cuppa with Viv Rook,” episode three) and swearing repeatedly because they want to show they speak like common people. They pride themselves on being ignoramuses (episodes two and four), which incidentally shows their class contempt. So they too are “cutting the language down to the bone” (Orwell 1989: 54), like the lexicographers of the eleventh edition of the dictionary of Newspeak. When Rook wishes to “look at the words [and] tear them down” (episode five), that is to better muddle their historical connotations, comparing concentration camps and concentrated orange juice. The same fact comes with two contradictory meanings, in the manner of “doublethink.” “Camps rife with disease” are alternatively qualified as “regrettable” and “fitting,” just as “natural selection” is either “neglect” or “efficient.” Populist leaders keep misnaming and simplifying things to eradicate concepts and blur general understanding of complex situations, sometimes because they do not even understand them themselves as when Rook is humiliated during a debate that reveals her ignorance of key economic principles (episode two). She nonetheless manages to reverse the situation because she is a master of “duckspeak” (i.e. brainless but powerful rhetoric) (Orwell 1989; 57, 322). She makes amends and plays with her audience’s feelings to make them express their revulsion at children’s access to pornography, which enables her to fall on her feet as they forget her initial mistake. Ironically, she manages to rally support through her promised crusade against high-tech giants while she tells her supporters to tweet this moment.

18In Years and Years, the mass and social media also act as a form of Thought Police but in a seemingly soft, non-coercive manner. As such, they could be paving the way to the world of Nineteen Eighty-Four because they are opinion-makers and conditioners whose role is to dumb down the nation and indoctrinate inconspicuously:

The invention of print made it easier to manipulate public opinion, and the film and the radio carried the process further. With the development of television, and the technical advance which made it possible to receive and transmit simultaneously on the same instrument [like the Internet, editor’s note], private life came to an end. Every citizen, or at least every citizen important enough to be worth watching, could be kept for twenty-four hours a day under the eyes of the police and in the sound of official propaganda, with all other channels of communication closed. The possibility of enforcing not only complete obedience to the will of the State, but complete uniformity of opinion on all subjects, now existed for the first time. (Orwell 1989: 214)

19There is still a plurality of channels so an impression of choice in the miniseries. Yet, the overall discourse is roughly the same. Rapidly, anyone who asks the wrong questions is committing Thoughtcrime (Orwell 1989: 21) and is quickly disposed of, like the interviewee mentioning the Disappeared, arrested live on irrelevant but discrediting charges (episode 5), or the reporter that keeps asking embarrassing questions to the Prime Minister during a press conference and is bluntly rebuked and anathemised (episode six). The general acceptance of the loss of privacy due to invasive digital technology can similarly be put down on people’s need to “keep up with the Joneses” and belong, based on the assumed, media-induced dream life they see on television all day. In episode five, Stephens and Celeste realise they surrounded their daughter with screens from birth and are therefore responsible for her total lack of concern towards transhumanism.

  • 14 Orwell had even foreseen cancel culture when describing the “process of continuous alteration [appl (...)
  • 15 As she hosts a debate entitled “are deep fake videos true?” Rook claims they “are threatening democ (...)

20Coaxing people into thinking what one wants while they remain unaware of the process can be achieved by keeping them in a constant state of confusion, offering a platform to all peddlers of doubt. Viewers/citizens can believe or disbelieve anything since everything becomes a matter of opinion and all facts are moot points. Truth becomes a battle of wills, as the repetition of the word “deny” shows in the miniseries (episodes three, five, six), and increasingly harder to establish. Rumours and urban legends have always existed. However, infobesity, viral sensationalism, and the lack of news selectivity have undeniably amplified the rise of conspiracy theories that start accumulating in a post-truth age, a concept popularised by Donald Trump who gets re-elected in the miniseries. The outcome of which could be that, in Nineteen Eighty-Four, Julia is convinced that the rocket bombs falling on London are fired by the government “to keep people frightened.” (Orwell 1989: 160) The Internet by delisting or deleting websites can act like Orwell’s memory holes (Orwell 1989: 40). When she tries to look up for information about the Disappeared, Edith realises there is nothing online, “which proves there is something wrong because you never have nothing.” (episode five, 14’) She suspects “any reference is being scrubbed out of existence.” Beside unofficial censorship, technology can now alter or “rectify” (Orwell 1989: 41, 190) both the past and the present14 as exemplified with a particularly upsetting scene in episode four.15 The use of fake news and deep fakes (using CGI models of the people you want to imitate) makes “reality control” even easier than in Nineteen Eighty-Four, so much so that the reality principle seems to stop applying. Winston’s words as he starts his diary have never sounded so powerful: “[T]o the future or to the past, […] to a time when truth exists and what is done cannot be undone […] from the age of Big Brother – greetings!” (Orwell 1989: 30)

  • 16 They announce the age of Big Brother when “history has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless pr (...)

21The result of this general state of confusion and scepticism is predictable and points towards the age of reality control through the combination of “doublethink” – “the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them” (Orwell 1989: 223) – and “crimestop” – “the faculty of stopping short, as though by instinct, at the threshold of any dangerous thought […] in short, protective stupidity” (Orwell 1989: 220) – as the media are the gravediggers of sanity and democracy. The frantic succession of news and controversies (as shown by the pace of the newsreels that regularly punctuate the miniseries) results in viewers/citizens losing track of the chain of events, living in an eternal present16 and stopping caring about what they see as details. In Nineteen Eighty-Four, Winston is horrified to realise that Julia does not remember that the enemy of Oceania has changed recently, and that she does not care since “the news is all lies anyway.” (Orwell 1989: 161) He therefore concludes that

the world-view of the Party imposed itself most successfully on people incapable of understanding it. They could be made to accept the most flagrant violations of reality, because they never fully grasped the enormity of what was demanded of them, and they were not sufficiently interested in public events to notice what was happening. (Orwell 1989: 163)

22To reach that level of “dumbing down”, Years and Years shows that the role of the media is to combine cheap entertainment and simplistic debates so that viewers are kept in a “moronic inferno.” (Amis 2006) During a casual conversation, Daniel is flabbergasted to realise that Ralph, his husband who is a teacher, is open to absurd speculations, which leads him to conclude that “intelligence is going backwards. We’re in reverse. The human race is getting more stupid in front of our eyes.” (episode one) The long-term negative impact of the media is such that, as he realises, “our brains are devolving.” (episode one) Announcing the age of Big Brother, the system sees to it that more and more people are “unwilling and unable to think too deeply on any subject whatever.” (Orwell 1989: 220) The incipient manipulation of crowds and the climate of doubt it generates is detrimental to everyone. Even the most politicised citizens such as Edith are not immune. She almost sympathises with Rook as someone who wants “to shake up the system” and “is ripping up democracy” (episode three), before becoming obsessed with rumours about Rook’s alleged escape whereas the latter has officially been arrested (episode six).

  • 17 O’Brien argues that “reality is not external. Reality exists in the human mind, and nowhere else. N (...)
  • 18 The ability to read (and write) books is important in Orwell’s novel (192) and punishable by death (...)

23Like the book, the miniseries implies that education and ethics are key elements of citizenship. When “the level of popular education is declining, what opinions the masses hold, or do not hold, is looked on as a matter of indifference. They can be granted intellectual liberty because they have no intellect.” (Orwell 1989: 219) A climate of anti-intellectualism soon turns uneducated citizens into the sheep of Animal Farm prone to herd instinct and groupthink. Stephen’s manager’s reaction, when the latter looks at his CV, shows this anti-intellectualism. The employer mocks his over-qualification while revealing his muddle-headedness, confusing notions such as astrology and astronomy before ranting over bankers (episode three). The importance of remaining alert, thinking and active is underlined as an echo of the frequent use of the words “conscious/consciousness” in the book because authoritarian rulers and the media continuously try to mould that consciousness or at least influence it (Orwell 1989: 216), especially when it is only intermittent in citizens (Orwell 1989: 224). Democracy is “worn out” (says Edith) or jeopardised when disinterest in politics is general, considered to be boring, like the news, or enjoyed like a Hollywood blockbuster (episode five). Passivity (symbolised by the numerous scenes in which the characters watch television half asleep) and abstention take over (episode three). People do not pay attention to accumulating evidence of fraud from potential candidates (episodes two and three) before they realise too late that the law has changed against their interest (like Daniel and Viktor in episode two); or elections become a source of mass hysteria because they are used by firebrands for their own personal agenda. Taking an IQ test to be allowed to vote as suggested brashly by Rook or making vote compulsory (episode four) may not be the solution however. The decision leads to a “Parliament of Water” that dissolves itself very rapidly to usher in a new authoritarian ruler. Only education and general knowledge can maintain a large, democratic consensus over what, for lack of a better word, is called reality17 and prevent revisionism and conspiracy theories as hoaxes become news and potential truth to the undiscriminating mind. The miniseries shows how technology can be used to both good and bad purposes, notably with the final uprising against the migrant camp and the estate checkpoint (episode six), which looks like a battle of images between the security forces and the rioters. But the only way to use technology wisely is to always keep a sensible attitude. Even those who are not educated in the standard academic way18 can prove to be good, sensible citizens since, in keeping with Orwell’s humanist ideas, the miniseries makes a plea for a type of populism that is different from the one invoked by extremist politicians (Bégout 2017: 71, 89). This populism stems from the belief in common people or ordinary citizens, such as Winston who believes that “the spirit of Man” will defeat Big Brother (Orwell 1989: 282). Years and Years’s pattern of a dissenting group of individuals and their initiation journey trying to resist an increasingly alienating system confirms its dystopian nature although the fact that they are several of them and that they are successful also confirms its status as a prequel to Nineteen Eighty-Four since, in the terminal stage of a dystopia, the hero tends to be isolated and defeated (Godin 2010).

“If there is hope, it lies in the proles”

  • 19 The concept has never been the object of a specific essay but the expression can be found in many o (...)

24Several characters in the miniseries demonstrate what Orwell labelled common decency,19 that instinctive moral sense, spontaneous reaction and social behaviour that is supposed to come out of ordinary people naturally attached to values such as simplicity, the refusal of domination and injustice, the distrust of authority, solidarity, respect and loyalty (Bégout 2017: 13, 16-7, 28, 44, 66). It acts as a moral compass which causes indignation and repugnance towards evil and can therefore be a mode of resistance against oppressive regimes (Bégout 2017: 28-9). Common decency is what differentiates true ordinary citizens from those who pretend to speak in their name, like Rook who participates in popular gameshows (episode three), claims she represents “the ambition of the ordinary man and woman” (episode one), celebrates “hard-working families,” “acts all normal” and includes herself in “the rest of us normal people” while she is a multimillionaire. Common decency also stems from self-esteem, which explains why it can eventually push apolitical citizens to take action (Bégout 2017: 30-2, 42, 70). Years and Years exemplifies Orwell’s concept by showing faith in ordinary people’s ability to use their common sense despite being plunged into an increasingly manipulative system designed to make them lose contact with reality. That is why all the protagonists can, to some extent, be related to the character of Winston. The miniseries, an ensemble piece describing the lives of four siblings and their respective circles, not only provides a universal appeal so that any spectator can identify with them but also defragments the hero of Nineteen Eighty-Four as if they were potentially a four-sided reflection of Winston’s various personality traits. Each of them is given a monologue (Daniel in episode one, Edith in episode two, Rosie and Stephen in episode five, Muriel in episode six) as the camera slowly zooms in on their faces and the soundtrack builds into a crescendo before launching a newsreel, a device that enables them to vent their fear and frustration and is reminiscent of Winston’s stream of consciousness.

  • 20 The container that serves as shelter for Viktor and is the place where the couple have sex for the (...)
  • 21 Julia is described as “not clever” but possessing “practical cunning” to fool the system (133, 135- (...)
  • 22 His behaviour also betrays his discomfort among his amoral yuppie colleagues. He remains silent whi (...)

25Despite their diverging political leanings and personalities, all the family members end up feeling so disgusted by Rook’s policies that they come out of their carefree daze. Winston’s closest embodiment is Daniel who is an aware citizen but is made more personally involved when he meets Viktor in one of the refugee camps he oversees.20 Like Winston starts thinking of engaging in active rebellion once he has met Julia (Orwell 1989: 159), Daniel breaks the law and dies trying to get his deported lover back home. Edith, his older sister, is closer to the legendary Brotherhood that Winston fantasises on, turning into an undercover activist whose plan is to “start a war” (episode six). Rosie, his instinctive and pragmatic younger sister, is akin to Julia21 who impresses Winston with her witty comments and ways of dodging the rules (Orwell 1989: 133-6). Stephen, the older brother, is the Winston who has to undergo the torture sessions of O’Brien to admit “two plus two make five.” (Orwell 1989: 261-4) Woody, Stephen’s former colleague and new cynical boss, needs “monkeys,” “someone who can say yes” while Stephen/Winston is the man who says no (episode five). The conversation at the pub turns into an interrogation and a duel as shown by the evolution of field size. Medium shots of the two men or over-the-shoulder shots switch to alternating increasingly extreme close-ups and medium shots of the two men in profile. Woody uses bullying and paternalism like O’Brien to pressurise Stephen with his questions and make him admit the nuclear attack of Hong Sha never occurred while Stephen’s sister, Edith, was irradiated there. Out of intimidation and the desperate need for a job, Stephen reluctantly admits that “Hong Sha is debatable.” The result is therefore not quite comparable to the one exposed by O’Brien – “We are not content with negative obedience, nor even with the most abject submission. When you finally surrender to us, it must be of your free will.” (Orwell 1989: 267) – but self-discipline is already required and power about “inflicting pain and humiliation” (Orwell 1989: 279). However, owing to the resurgence of common decency that almost drives him to suicide out of self-hatred, Stephen who is said to be “ordinary” also takes part in the revolution against Rook’s government as a whistle-blower (episode six). His attitude during her speech with Nazi undertones (episode five) shows his disbelief and shock which match the comments he usually made watching the news (“They can’t do that! / She can’t say that!”).22 Bethany, just like Winston, is the cog in the government/AI machinery that becomes a piece of grit.

  • 23 In his search for truth/evidence (39, 78, 191), he keeps believing in records (163) and memories (2 (...)
  • 24 O’Brien explains: “We shall crush down to the point from which there is no coming back […] Never ag (...)

26Common decency is also intrinsically linked to emotional life and human relations (Bégout 2017: 26, 73). It is both an intellectual faculty and a visceral feeling. Winston is eager to find a way to define and secure the past in a world that uses history as a palimpsest (Orwell 1989: 29, 42). He concludes that only human consciousness and morality can act as a safeguard against falsification and destruction (Orwell 1989: 37).23 He might be amazed at the water-memory technology of the final episode designed to store a dying person’s memory/memories and possibly consciousness in water tanks. Yet, the process shows that all this collected data is not just information or code but what Edith calls “love,” in other words human bonds and interactions. Remaining a human being i.e. showing common decency in all circumstances, especially when democracies collapse, is to be able to use one’s intellect but also to feel emotions and sensations. As Winston explains, under torture, “confession is not betrayal. What you say or do doesn’t matter: only feelings matter” since “the inner heart, whose workings [are] mysterious even to yourself, [remain] impregnable.” (Orwell 1989: 173-4) Both the book and the miniseries show that the numbing effect of the media results in a zombification process,24 so holding on to the physicality of the human body is a form of resistance, just like sex is political in the book because it is forbidden unless it is “duty to the Party” i.e. procreation (Orwell 1989: 70, 133, 319). Experiencing emotions and sensations grounds people into the real, contrary to sophisticated technologies that have a derealising effect because they disconnect the objectivity (logic) and subjectivity (perception) of facts (Bégout 2017: 106-7, 115-6). Maintaining contact with the physical world thus also seems to be part of resisting authoritarian rules in the book and the miniseries. Winston’s very Proustian memories are always triggered by his senses – the room, chocolate, the bottle of wine (Orwell 1989: 100, 128, 178). His first act of rebellion is to use pen and paper to start his diary, rather than using the speak-write (Orwell 1989: 8-9). He clings to the memory of a photograph he once held in his hands (Orwell 1989: 82, 162-3). In Years and Years, Rook’s demise starts with the return to printing and paper files stored in good old-fashioned cabinets (episode five). Although Rosie is happy to see that the Council lady she must speak to via a video-call is not a bot, she complains when she realises the latter is in fact just behind the wall because physical contact can bring more sympathy (episode five).

  • 25 In some of his interviews, Russell T. Davies insists on the notion of family as a protective place (...)
  • 26 What finally crushes Winston is his betrayal of Julia (300, 305-6).

27Common decency comes from the shared experience of everyday life and is rooted in popular culture (Bégout 2017: 21-7, 97-8, 100-1). That may be why the miniseries insists on the importance of family as a bulwark against all disruptive forces. The major difference with Nineteen Eighty-Four’s world is that the concept has not yet “become in effect an extension of the Thought Police” (Orwell 1989: 140).25 Information and biotechnology do give anxious parents the opportunity to spy on their children’s internet history (episode one) or a suspicious wife the ability to check her husband’s calls (episode three). But despite a few betrayals out of momentary jealousy that can nonetheless be far-reaching (episodes two and five), British family members do not report their loved ones to the police as Ukrainian parents do in the miniseries or children-spies in the book (Orwell 1989: 25-7, 245).26 The camera often underlines how family bonds can offer some form of resistance to degrading living conditions by operating panoramic or circular movements that embrace the characters forming a nucleus whereas, by contrast, the direction is much more frontal and oppositional when Rook is talking to her audience, although she means to seduce them. The family meals and parties the Lyonses regularly organise are not just a form of escapism in a collapsing world and, even so, they echo Winston’s resort to gin in his moments of despair. They are a way to share that daily, ordinary life experience that nurtures common decency. These recurring moments offer a cyclical vision of time that counteracts the detrimental effects of the racing timeline created by the newsreels montages. This representation of family as an infallible anchor is also symbolised by the crumbling but forever standing family house that brings together generations. It epitomises “the privateness of English life” as an expression of the nation’s belief in “the liberty of the individual” that starts with “the liberty to have a home of your own, to do what you like in your spare time, to choose your own amusements instead of having them chosen for you from above.” (Orwell 1968: 66) The Lyonses gather around them relatives, friends and neighbours who eventually all demonstrate a certain degree of common decency. This might be because, owing to the war, Orwell gradually extended his concept from the working class through ordinary people to the whole English nation (Bégout 2017: 19-24).

Conclusion

28Although Years and Years has never been officially envisioned as a prequel to Nineteen Eighty-Four, its subliminal Orwellian legacy makes it a perfect example of a contemporary British dystopia. To an American critic, there is indeed something inherently British in the way it presents its dystopian world:

Watching ‘Years and Years,’ I was reminded not of other shows on the air but of recent novels by Rachel Cusk, Olivia Laing, John Lanchester, David Mitchell, and Ali Smith, all of which framed the journey from our time into the future the way it actually exists for normal, unspecial characters, as a continuous and seamless present in which even unimaginable chaos must be borne up under, given the nature of the alternative. All of these books are worth citing, together, because they share a crucial trait. Their authors, like ‘Years and Years’ creator Davies, are British. […] Britons live in the memory of what had once been; they are citizens of a power that exists now in memory and ritual but no longer as the defining force on the world stage. Little wonder that they are quite so good at telling stories that depict shifts in historical currents not as apocalypses demanding the rise of heroes but as rising tides that, given their intractable power, must simply be endured. (D’Addario 2019)

  • 27 The writer explains: “It was very specifically 15 years because that way you don’t have to change t (...)

29Whether that sense of stoicism has to do with so-called British phlegm or not, the fact is that Orwell believed the English could never endure, let alone support, an extremist regime due to the national character (Orwell 1968: 63-90). Paradoxically his vision remains the most relevant and influential British dystopia today. As a possible unavowed prequel designed to show not only where the UK is going, but how it is going there (Faure and Taïeb 2022), namely to Nineteen Eighty-Four, a future that was written 75 years ago, the aptly named Years and Years plays with temporalities (past, present, and future) and genres (family saga, science-fiction, dystopia) to offer some grounds for reflection to its viewers. The choice made by Russell T. Davies to present a world that is already here (Claisse 2010) was due to technical and artistic reasons.27 He made it clear that he was commissioned six hours from the start and that, whatever the financial offers or commercial success, he had no intention to revive the miniseries in another season (Turchiano 2019) – despite the “series 1” mentioned on the DVD sleeve. This duration was used to make projections but within limits, hence the 15 year span adopted and to allow for a near future approach, anchored in viewers’ already present state, rather than a more speculative, therefore distant, one. This format might also account for the open ending of the miniseries. Parey (2019b) explains that

Prequels often entertain a marked strong intertextual relationship with their sources even if the audience will allow and expect relative (moderate) change due to the different period in time: these narrative expansions must thus compose with an existing character and the audience’s expectations coupled with the fact that the end has already been reached and cannot be changed.

30Although it appears as a potential prequel to Nineteen Eighty-Four, Years and Years does not link up exactly with its source-text. The open ending it presents is thus ambivalent. Can the end still be changed?

  • 28 Vivienne Rook eventually fails because the system put in place is not perfect yet. She could not co (...)

31On the one hand, the gap left unbridged may simply suggest Rook’s rise to power is but a rehearsal or a dry run paving the way for the future rise of Big Brother, not so much owing to history tending to repeat itself but because, as alluded to by Orwell himself (1989: 224), dictators learn from their predecessors’ mistakes.28 At first sight, the ending of the miniseries does not look as pessimistic as that of Orwell’s book – most of the protagonists survive relatively unscathed –, but it implies that the Big Brothers of our world are elusive and Hydra-like. That might eventually prove just as frightening, making the miniseries just a step further towards the advent of Nineteen Eighty-Four. All the more so since it does not use Orwell’s dystopia as a “uchronic precedent” (Claisse 2010) as some self-proclaimed sequels have done (Claisse 2010; Fieu 2017) as if to better make it a thing of the past and analyse new threats and fears. The fact that it is an unintentional prequel rather shows that our present society is already halfway to Nineteen Eighty-Four. If spectres of Orwell can be spotted in Years and Years, that is not because of Russell T. Davies’s lack of imagination (see Faure and Taïeb 2022, for whom the miniseries is “a dystopia that reproduces the past” in terms of its representation of totalitarianism) but because Orwell remains as topical as ever. The perfectly integrated technological novelties combined with a very plausible political situation might explain the relatively disappointing ratings when the miniseries was first aired. Despite its critical success, viewers might have been put off by a representation of the world that looked so much like their everyday life and, as mentioned by the writer, many of his projections have since come true (Langlais 2019a).

32On the other hand, the gap left between the unavowed prequel and its source-text may show the still reversible character of its diegetic present/the viewer’s future, Nineteen Eighty-Four remaining the totally irreversible dystopian system to be avoided at all costs. If Years and Years mixes present and near future so effectively, that is to compel its audience to question what they take for granted and call on their sense of responsibility and willingness to act as citizens. In line with its Orwellian subtext of pessimistic yet unyielding lucidity (Bégout 2017: 124), Years and Years closes on a situation that is serious but not totally desperate hinting that citizens must reclaim and keep control over the past, the present and the future (Orwell 1989: 260) to ensure the survival of democratic institutions. Muriel, the grandmother, insists, “it’s all our fault […] we let it happen. This is the world we built.” Her words once again resonate perfectly with Orwell’s intention. Interestingly, to define his novel, he did not use the word “dystopia” – a word that, admittedly, may not have been so widespread then. Still, he saw his book as a “parody” of his contemporary world and his message to readers was typical of dystopian writers:

It has been suggested by some reviewers of Nineteen Eighty-Four that it is the author’s view that this, or something like this, is what will happen inside the next forty years in the Western world. This is not correct. I think that, allowing for the book being after all a parody, something like Nineteen Eighty-Four could happen. This is the direction in which the world is going at the present time, and the trend lies deep in the political, social and economic foundations of the contemporary world situation. […] The moral to be drawn from this dangerous nightmare situation is a simple one: Don’t let it happen. It depends on you.” (Crick 1981: 395)

  • 29 “Les hypothèses fictionnelles peuvent aider à ouvrir des espaces de débat et ainsi à construire ou (...)
  • 30 “La science-fiction redonne une importance au futur, rappelle le caractère transitoire du temps pré (...)

33All sources (to name but a few: Claisse 2010, Rumpala 2010) concur to explain that, ultimately, the aim of dystopian science-fiction is to state a hypothesis so that it never happens.29 The future is not ineluctable. It is what you make of it. In other words, it is always the result of some previous choices.30 Russell T. Davies, just like Orwell, is not a prophet of doom. He says he believes in happy endings (Turchiano 2019) but the underlying reason for his dystopian inclination is the same i.e. remind viewers that the future remains unwritten and that they can be the deus ex-machina of their (hi)story (if they want to). Will they let it happen? The miniseries thus appears as a warning for technophile, numbed 21st-century audiences easily lured by enticing figures that, unlike the original Big Brother, they do not have to be tortured to embrace. It is a reminder that many Winstons will be necessary to ensure the survival of some form of democracy. The ending may be closer to V for Vendetta with its uprising sweeping the country but, in keeping with Winston’s reflections, it does point out that only human nature can put an end to human idiocy, greed and thirst for power. When a security officer dismisses Edith’s threats asking her “Who’s watching you?”, she answers “Everyone!” as she keeps filming him. To avert Big Brother’s world, all citizens must be the watchdogs of democracy.

Top of page

Bibliography

Corpus

Davies, Russell T. Years and Years. DVD: Studiocanal, OPTD4323, 2019.

Other Sources

Amis, Martin. The Moronic Inferno: And Other Visits to America. London: Vintage, 2006.

BBC. “BNP leader Nick Griffin: ‘Britain is full’.” BBC, 23 Apr. 2010. URL: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/election_2010/8640154.stm.

Bégout, Bruce. De la décence ordinaire. Paris: Allia, [2008] 2017.

Bitel, Anton. “10 great dystopian TV shows.” BFI, 7 Apr. 2022. URL: https://www.bfi.org.uk/lists/10-great-dystopian-tv-shows.

Claisse, Frédéric. “Futurs antérieurs et précédents uchroniques : l’anti-utopie comme conjuration de la menace.” Temporalités 12, 15 Dec. 2010. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/temporalites.1406.

Cook, John. Years and Years: Russell T. Davies drama gazes into near future with unmissable dread.” The Conversation, 27 Jun. 2019. URL: theconversation.com/years-and-years-russell-t-davies-drama-gazes-into-near-future-with-unmissable-dread-119486.

Crick, Bernard. George Orwell: A Life. London: Secker & Warburg, 1981.

D’Addario, Daniel. “TV Review: ‘Years and Years’.” Variety, 22 Jun. 2019. URL: variety.com/2019/tv/reviews/years-and-years-review-emma-thompson-hbo-1203243714/.

Faure, Antoine and Emmanuel Taïeb. “Years and Years. Temps et politisation.” ReS Futurae 19, 29 Jun. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/resf.10955.

Fieu, Roger-Pierre. “De 1984 à 2084. Mutations de la peur totalitaire dans la dystopie européenne.” Carnets Deuxième série 11, 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/carnets.2344.

Franquebalme, Benoît. “Anticipassions.” Marianne 1173, 6-12 Sept. 2019: 75.

Langlais, Pierre. “Un peu d’amour dans un monde de brutes.” Télérama 3633, 28 Aug. 2019a: 69-71.

Genette, Gérard. Palimpsests: Literature in the Second Degree. Lincoln and London: University of Nebraska Press, 1997. Translated from Palimpsestes. La littérature au second degré. Paris: Seuil, “Poétique”, rééd. “Points”, 1982.

Godin, Christian. “Sens de la contre-utopie.” Cités 42, 2010/2, p.61-68. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3917/cite.042.0061.

Langlais, Pierre. “‘Years and Years’, chronique familiale douce-amère dans la Grande-Bretagne de demain.” Télérama, 14 May 2019b. URL: www.telerama.fr/series-tv/years-and-years%2C-chronique-familiale-douce-amere-dans-la-grande-bretagne-de-demain%2Cn6252333.php.

Mangan, Lucy. Years and Years review – a glorious near-future drama from Russell T. Davies.” The Guardian, 14 May 2019. URL: www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2019/may/14/years-and-years-review-a-glorious-near-future-drama-from-russell-t-davies.

Martin, Laura. “Years and Years: Russell T. Davies’ terrifying new dystopian family drama is ‘Our Friends in the North meets Black Mirror’.” Inews.co.uk, 15 Apr. 2019. URL: https://inews.co.uk/culture/television/years-and-years-russell-t-davies-black-mirror-our-friends-in-the-north-280338.

MacInnes, Paul. “Future shock: why Years and Years is 2019’s most terrifying TV show.” The Guardian, 18 Jun. 2019. URL: www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2019/jun/18/years-and-years-2019-terrifying-tv-show-russell-t-davies.

Merrick, Rob. “Johnson ‘told Italy’s PM’ that ‘herd immunity’ was his policy.” The Independent, 4 Jun. 2020. URL: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/coronavirus-uk-boris-johnson-herd-immunity-dispatches-channel-4-italy-prime-minister-a9544916.html.

Nunberg, Geoffrey. “Simpler Terms; If It’s ‘Orwellian,’ It’s Probably Not.” The New York Times, 22 Jun. 2003. URL: https://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/22/weekinreview/simpler-terms-if-it-s-orwellian-it-s-probably-not.html.

Nussbaum, Emily. “‘Years and Years’ Forces Us into the Future.” The New Yorker, 22 Jul. 2019. URL: www.newyorker.com/magazine/2019/07/29/years-and-years-forces-us-into-the-future.

O’Grady, Sean. “Years and Years review: Emma Thompson is brilliant in dystopian BBC drama.” The Independent, 14 May 2019a. URL: www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/reviews/years-and-years-emma-thompson-russell-t-davies-doctor-who-rory-kinnear-a8911686.html.

O’Grady, Sean. “Years and Years review, episode 5: Emma Thompson makes for a chillingly evil British prime minister.” The Independent, 11 Jun. 2019b. URL: www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/reviews/years-and-years-episode-5-review-tv-emma-thompson-bbc-rory-kinnear-a8953886.html.

Orwell, George. Inside the Whale and Other Essays. London: Penguin, [1957] 1968.

Orwell, George. Nineteen Eighty-Four. London: Penguin, [1949] 1989.

Orwell, George. The Road to Wigan Pier. London: Penguin, [1937] 1967.

Parey, Armelle (ed.). Prequels, Coquels and Sequels in Contemporary Anglophone Fiction. New York: Routledge, 2019a.

Parey, Armelle. “Becoming Morse in Endeavour: the prequel as locus of reconstruction of the past?” TV/Series 15, 2019b. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/tvseries.3751.

Poniewozik, James. “In ‘Years and Years,’ Things Fall Apart, Fast.” The New York Times, 23 Jun. 2019. URL: www.nytimes.com/2019/06/23/arts/television/years-and-years-review-hbo.html.

Rumpala, Yannick. “Ce que la science-fiction pourrait apporter à la pensée politique.” Raisons politiques 40, 2010/4: 97-113. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3917/rai.040.0097.

Rumpala, Yannick. “Littérature à potentiel heuristique pour temps incertains.” Methodos 15, 24 Jun. 2015. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/methodos.4178.

Sich, Adam, James Bullock and Simon Roberts. “What is the Cambridge Analytica scandal?” The Guardian, 19 Mar. 2019. URL: https://www.theguardian.com/news/video/2018/mar/19/everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-cambridge-analytica-expose-video-explainer.

Soligny, Sophie. “Years and Years.” Another Film Another Planet, 19 Nov. 2019. URL: anotherfilmanotherplanet.com/2019/11/19/years-and-years/.

Tallerico, Brian. “HBO’s Years and Years is Fascinating Vision of the Future.” RogerEbert.com, 24 Jun. 2019. URL: www.rogerebert.com/streaming/hbos-years-and-years-is-fascinating-vision-of-the-future.

Turchiano, Danielle. “Russell T. Davies Breaks Down Balancing Global Politics and a Multi-Year Family Saga in ‘Years and Years’.” Variety, 24 Jun. 2019. URL: https://variety.com/2019/tv/features/years-and-years-russell-t-davies-interview-1203248705/.

Zuboff, Shoshana. The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power. London: Profile Books, 2019.

Top of page

Notes

1 All translations in the body text from articles originally written in French are mine.

2 Faure and Taïeb (2022), in line with Russell T. Davies, mention a “glissement vers la dystopie”.

3 This quote is taken from the speech Vivienne Rook makes when she gets appointed as Prime Minister, with a mock-Churchillian world view that nonetheless confirms the tripartite division mentioned: “To the west, America is a lone wolf. To the east, Europe is in flames, and beyond that China is rising. In standing alone, this country has never been more magnificent.” This moment marks a breaking point with Stephens’s earlier comment: “We are American. Our business, our culture. We’re not European, are we” (episode two).

4 In episode four, Daniel tries to reassure Viktor that the police and immigration services never come to their door, “not for people like us” i.e. respectable Middle England.

5 The word “reminiscent” is used a few times in this article although, as explained, Nineteen Eighty-Four is not a conscious source of inspiration for the writer. It must be assumed that intertextuality works unintentionally.

6 There might also be a nod to the Italian Five Star Movement and the fact that she opens her own channel echoes the career of Silvio Berlusconi (O’Grady 2019a).

7 The love/hate relationship the two superpowers nourish is reminiscent of the fake war manoeuvres described in Orwell’s book which never “involves the risk of serious defeat. […] The plan is, by a combination of fighting, bargaining and well-timed strokes of treachery, to acquire a ring of bases completely encircling one or other of the rival states, and then to sign a pact of friendship with that rival and remain on peaceful terms for so many years as to lull suspicion to sleep. During this time rockets loaded with atomic bombs can be assembled at all the strategic spots; finally they will all be fired simultaneously, with effects so devastating as to make retaliation impossible. It will then be time to sign a pact of friendship with the remaining world-power, in preparation for another attack” (203).

8 Real chocolate is also a luxury in the book and can only be obtained thanks to black market (127-8), just like real bread, sugar and coffee (147). Oranges and lemons are a source of wonder for Julia (153). In the miniseries, the Lyonses end up eating “electric food” produced from bacteria.

9 When Stephens meets her by chance, he tries to start a casual conversation with her and thinks he will please her by blaming the Russians for their problems, an assertion to which she abruptly answers “don’t be so stupid”. She perfectly illustrates the attitude described in Goldstein’s book (200): “In his capacity as an administrator, it is often necessary for a member of the Inner Party to know that this or that item of war news is untruthful, and he may often be aware that the entire war is spurious and is either not happening or is being waged for purposes quite other than the declared one: but such knowledge is easily neutralised by the technique of doublethink.”

10 Faure and Taïeb (2022) think the deictic is proof that representations of totalitarian regimes in dystopian series are still very much influenced by WW2 camps, anticipating a form of déjà-vu.

11 The BNP’s 2010 manifesto claimed that “Britain [was] full” (BBC 2010).

12 The trucks that transport them announce the war prisoner convoys described by Orwell (121-2), people of Oceania being forbidden to have any contact with them (204).

13 Her charity cause for a game entitled “pointless” is to build a statue for all the horses killed in World War One (episode two). She lip-synchs and dances on “Tragedy” by the Bee Gees (episode three). She puts on a Santa hat to wish a merry Christmas to the country (episode five).

14 Orwell had even foreseen cancel culture when describing the “process of continuous alteration [applying] not only to newspapers, but to books, periodicals, pamphlets, posters, leaflets, films, soundtracks, cartoons, photographs – to every kind of literature or documentation which might conceivably hold any political or ideological significance […] or which conflicted with the needs of the moment” (42).

15 As she hosts a debate entitled “are deep fake videos true?” Rook claims they “are threatening democracy.” She shows a Conservative and a Labour MP expressing hyperbolic views (“kill migrants/kill the rich”) with a voice glitch that signals the forgery. Yet, she concludes: “all the same, they really did say those things, didn’t they?”

16 They announce the age of Big Brother when “history has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right” (162).

17 O’Brien argues that “reality is not external. Reality exists in the human mind, and nowhere else. Not in the individual mind, which can make mistakes, and in any case soon perishes: only in the mind of the Party, which is collective and immortal. Whatever the Party holds to be the truth, is truth” (261).

18 The ability to read (and write) books is important in Orwell’s novel (192) and punishable by death (8) as all books have been destroyed (101) to, at best, be rewritten. Only Inner Party members such as O’Brien can use notebooks and pencils (165). Winston thinks a slip of paper is so dangerous that he throws it into the memory hole (166). That books and paper are dangerous to dictatorships may be a statement by omission in the miniseries because none are seen, being a thing of the past, although general blackouts force people to use printing again and paper files prove to be less easy to forge or hide.

19 The concept has never been the object of a specific essay but the expression can be found in many of Orwell’s writings, notably The Road to Wigan Pier (Orwell 1967) or England Your England (Orwell 1968). It has since been analysed by French philosophers (Bégout 2017).

20 The container that serves as shelter for Viktor and is the place where the couple have sex for the first time is reminiscent of the room in the prole area where Winston and Julia regularly meet (158).

21 Julia is described as “not clever” but possessing “practical cunning” to fool the system (133, 135-6).

22 His behaviour also betrays his discomfort among his amoral yuppie colleagues. He remains silent while they keep chanting on demand from Woody and strew his files on the floor.

23 In his search for truth/evidence (39, 78, 191), he keeps believing in records (163) and memories (258-61), although he realises that the former can be falsified and the latter can fail (97). The miniseries confirms that with the epilogue. What is assumed to be the usual newsreel montage turns out to be Edith’s memories and imagination (i.e. projection into the future) that Bethany partially disagrees with (episode six). “I like my version” she says to her aunt because it gives a more important part to her father’s redemption.

24 O’Brien explains: “We shall crush down to the point from which there is no coming back […] Never again will you be capable of ordinary human feelings. Everything will be dead inside you. Never again will you be capable of love, or friendship, or joy of living, or laughter, or curiosity, or courage, or integrity. You will be hollow. We shall squeeze you empty, and then we shall fill you with ourselves” (269). Winston’s final moments show a sort of lobotomisation, unable to fix his mind and analyse his primitive sensations (301).

25 In some of his interviews, Russell T. Davies insists on the notion of family as a protective place that makes life bearable and brings some light to the miniseries (Langlais 2019a, 71).

26 What finally crushes Winston is his betrayal of Julia (300, 305-6).

27 The writer explains: “It was very specifically 15 years because that way you don’t have to change the cast and you don’t have to lean on prosthetics. They get older, but they don’t age very much; Steven’s hairline alters slightly, but that’s about it. We didn’t put lots of gray hair on people. I feel the same as I did when I was 30, and I’m 56 now, and so although you see the passage of time, we wanted the characters to all feel the same. And also within 15 years, you don’t have to change every car on the street. It’s not particularly science fiction, but by the very end, it’s starting to dip its toe into that – in a very delicate and careful and joyous way, but that’s as far as I wanted to go, and if we pushed 20 years, who knows how it would go?” (Turchiano 2019)

28 Vivienne Rook eventually fails because the system put in place is not perfect yet. She could not completely “dislocate the sense of reality” of her British fellow-country people. “For the secret of rulership is to combine a belief in one’s own infallibility with the power to learn from past mistakes” (224).

29 “Les hypothèses fictionnelles peuvent aider à ouvrir des espaces de débat et ainsi à construire ou restaurer une forme de responsabilité collective à l’égard de ce qui n’est pas encore advenu mais qui pourrait constituer le futur.” (Rumpala 2010) He adds: “C’est parce que le présent contient les conditions de fabrication du futur que l’enjeu est aussi d’être capable de développer une réflexion à rebours, c’est-à-dire partant de projections dans l’avenir pour remonter vers des enjeux présents.” As for Claisse (2010): “Présent et futur se confondent dans ce qui ressemble à un cri d’alarme.”

30 “La science-fiction redonne une importance au futur, rappelle le caractère transitoire du temps présent et sous-entend que, hormis des catastrophes dues à des aléas non maîtrisables (comme la collision avec un astéroïde), les situations décrites fictivement restent fondamentalement les résultats de choix antérieurs faits par les collectifs humains.” (Rumpala 2015)

Top of page

References

Electronic reference

Anne-Lise Marin-Lamellet, Orwell’s Legacy in Years and Years (Russell T. Davies, 2019)Angles [Online], 18 | 2024, Online since 01 November 2024, connection on 17 April 2025. URL: http://journals.openedition.org/angles/8153; DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/12lxu

Top of page

About the author

Anne-Lise Marin-Lamellet

Anne-Lise Marin-Lamellet is a senior lecturer of English at the University of Saint-Étienne, France. She works on contemporary British studies and cinema or mini-series, mainly on issues of class, race, gender, and their relation to space and urban areas. She is the author of Working Class Hero, La Figure ouvrière dans le cinéma britannique depuis 1956 (PUP, 2022), and co-edited La ville industrielle à l’écran, Objet cinématographique à identifier (PUFR, 2022) and De l’invisibilité à la visibilité : représentations des marges diasporiques (APU, 2023).
Contact : anne.lise.marin.lamellet @ univ-st-etienne.fr

By this author

Top of page

Copyright

CC-BY-4.0

The text only may be used under licence CC BY 4.0. All other elements (illustrations, imported files) are “All rights reserved”, unless otherwise stated.

Top of page
Search OpenEdition Search

You will be redirected to OpenEdition Search