Since his death in 1993, there has been a decline of interest in the wider work of Anthony Burgess, with only a small and predictable number of his works being currently available to the intellectually curious.
This neccesarily means that '1985' (1978) is currently out of print, ignored by the wider public and generally attracting comment only for the apparent portrayal of Britain under an Islamic system of governance. Whilst it is true to say that Islam does figure within the novel, it does so in an entirely secondary way, providing little more than a convenient ideological counterweight to the true target of this short tale, the vision of a hyper-socialised Britain in which the world and themes drawn by George Orwell in '1984' are ruthlessly explored and questioned.
The book should, in many respects, be considered as providing a dual structured commentary on Orwell's earlier work, consisting of a series of short essay type pieces which, in a style similar to that of Borges, are framed within a simple Q and A narrative in which Burgess exaggerates and amplifies ideas and motifs from within the original text. Once this has been completed Burgess presents a short story, following the experiences of Bev Jones (the 'Winston Smith') as he struggles to live according to the stated wish of his dead wife ('Don't let them get away with it'), in a world which can be seen to reflect many of the contemporary concerns at the time of its original publication (the power of the trade unions, oil dependency, Islam, comparative moral relativism) with a broader framework concerned with examining the role of the individual as opposed to the state. Whilst this might not seem particularly original, the work moves swiftly and surely, propelled by the inventive linguistic turns in which Burgess excelled, and an undeniable humour which ensures that the sense of the comic and absurd is always present.
It is clear, obviously, that the particular vision offered by Burgess did not become manifest but that does not detract from some of the key questions posed by the book, which are as relevant now as when originally written. This is a highly political novel, related to similarly written dystopian visions (notably Zamyatin's 'We' and Huxley's 'Brave New World'), but offering a celebration of the individualism and romantic heroic freedom of creative humanism and the unique comedy of human existance and struggle.