Orwell was virulently anti-Stalinist. 1984 has to be seen in light of his involvement in the Spanish revolution, and with the Stalinists crushing the United Marxist Workers' Party (POUM), whose militia Orwell was a member of, and the mass anarchist CNT, which he sympathised with. Here's what he had to say:
He also said:
Orwell was much more than 1984 (a great book) and Animal Farm (a poor and much misused parable) and you'd do well to read a bit more Orwell. I recommend his Homage to Catalonia to give you a proper understanding of what's behind 1984.
By the way, there's not many (if any?) Stalininsts posting on Urban, so you're comparing apples with oranges, or Stalinism with those the Stalinists crushed.
Absolutely!
I read 1984 when I was quite young and it blew my mind. I wondered how anybody could have gotten to a point in their mind that they could produce a work of such horror.
So then I read everything and anything I could find by Orwell. As you say, his experiences in Spain are key to his political development, and Homage to Catalonia is the text that marks the change in Orwell.
I loved the way, in HtoC, that he informs his readers that particular chapters are going to deal with the politics of the Spanish Civil War, and that if they're not interested in that then they should feel free to skip to the next chapter!
I didn't skip. But I didn't understand any of it that much. Then I ended up studying the Spanish Civil War and finally, many years later, I got it! I understood how he had reached the point where he could write 1984 (and Animal Farm too).
Homage to Catalonia isn't the only thing Orwell wrote about the civil war, there are essays and letters too. The more you read the more you understand how important the Stalinist treachery effected Orwell's political understanding.
There is a Penguin book that collects together all of his writings about Spain. It's called 'Orwell in Spain' and it was very useful to me when I was studying*.
* Apart from one letter in there that the editor has dated wrong. I lost about three days thinking, "this can't be right, he's talking about something that hasn't happened yet!" After extensive cross-referencing I found the letter and the correct date. This made for a great footnote where I explained that editor Professor Davison had got his dates confused!