My English skills are at the same level as Arnold Schwarzenegger’s, and for study projects at upper secondary school in Denmark we have to make a summary of our project in English.
Is there one friendly soul who is willing to help me with correct some of the mistake I have made? I will appreciate the friendly soul with a lot of loooove, peeeace, and haaarmony the rest of her or his life... And of course beers if we come along a day while I teach you how dance like ugly Danish dwarfs, who are living in the pig houses of the country …
=) =) =) =)
My summary:
George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four can be compared with the New Testament. Orwell is dead and so are the writers of the New Testament. Today both right- and leftwinged politicians can interpret the meaning of Nineteen Eighty-Four in many ways like thousands of Christians persuasions can disscuss the meaning of the New Testament. To understand the foundation for why a novel can be interpreted that dissimilar I have chose two analysis methods. Deconstruction as a literary criticism and constructivism as a theory within society studies. The principle of deconstruction is that there is no objective interpretation of a text, while the principle of constructivism is that operators act from a subjective scheme of things. I used deconstruction to analyse biography of my own making about George Orwell, to analyse the genre, and to analyse the settings of the novel. There are of course basis for an anti-totalitarian interpretation, but likewise for an interpretation which can be used as a criticism against many tendencies in the world. For example against modern slavery, historical constructions, and the influence of spin doctors. To estimate and discuss why operators use Nineteen Eighty-Four as a frame of reference I used constructivism as my fundamental theory. The conclusion seen through constructivist spectacles was short and clear. Operators use Nineteen Eighty-Four as a frame of reference because it makes sense in proportion to their scheme of things and as a rhetorical effect.
as a Polish plummer, I can only suggest
delete 'both right- .......thousands can disscuss' and insert "politicians of all persuasions can interpret the meaning of Nineteen Eight-Four in many ways like Christians can argue over interpretations of the New Testament"
delete 'that dissimilar' and insert "in such dissimilar ways"
delete 'two analysis methods' insert "two methods of analysis"
the rest is unintelligible to a mere plummer, but I suggest it would improve with use of better punctuation.