The Orators Perspective On Extreme Authority

Formulating a perspicuous synopsis of The Orators’ perspective on extreme authority and its consequences is not worth considering as not only the idea behind the poem but the work itself is thoroughly confusing. In that aspect, it is not entirely bizarre that W. H. Auden himself would refer to the author as someone that “might well become a Nazi” (7) as it is more than probable to read several singled out excerpts as a declaration of desire for a fascist leader. The spirit of the reissue’s age plays a role in this self-condemnation as well: it seemed the poet was much more sensible to such extreme politics after what he wrote about came true, the fear of reliving the horrors caused by dictatorship in a post-World War II mindset. When closely analyzing how the work progresses (and with bearing its holistic nature in mind), however, it is very unlikely that the “phantasy [that he has] let run riot” (idem) would hint at such ideologies. If The Orators were more of a manifesto or

What the work does, however, is impose a paradox on what it would favor to be the ultimate society: coherent and homogenous, but with a grand space for individuality – two irreconcilable concepts. Without resolving this paradox, it opens up discussion for a division between authorities (which are, apparently, crucial for the structure of one’s life): firstly, an external leader that is moderately in charge of the structure of society – a father figure that was nowhere near a dictator but also did not condone the very liberal spirit of the United States (and its influence on politics in England). And secondly, an ‘internal’ voice that is not only authoritative on hopes and dreams, but on free will as