It’s harder to assess We on its own merits after reading 1984, given the influence of the former on the latter’s story is so strikingly clear. There’s the similarities between the two central characters (Winston and Julia v D-503 and I-330), an imposing authoritarian state that restricts individual freedoms in different ways, and the stories pushing towards similar endings.

Despite the similarities, We and 1984 possess different strengths. The writing in 1984 is more accessible to the modern reader, though part of that is because if you’re reading it in English, there isn’t the hurdle of translation you have to overcome. I also found the messaging in 1984 to be more coherent and impactful, as a cautionary tale about totalitarianism and its offshoots. We does that too, but it is at times unclear about what kind of story it wants to be, showcasing a story of obsession layered with the unravelling of personal ideologies and large-scale ideologies.

We boldly experiments with the fourth wall and a frantic deconstruction of the narrator’s mind in real time, which is invigorating but also borders on the line of being hard to read. A good translation goes a long way (Bela Shayevich’s translation was a welcome transition from Mirra Ginsburg’s one), but it can’t completely save the story.

Maybe a separate reading of We without having read 1984 beforehand would make the story’s strengths more apparent, but that’s not a perspective I can provide :)