Brave New World: Be careful what you wish for(Also posted at Fantasy Literature)We all know Brave New World (1932) as a classic dystopian tale of a world bereft of conflict, pain, hardship, but also lacking individuality, free will, and intellectual thought. You were probably forced to read it in high school (I somehow missed it) and if you were a normal teen it must be have been either very weird or strangely appealing (unlimited free drugs and sex, a carefree life). Granted, it's a brilliant critique of the early socialist utopias penned by H.G. Wells. After that the Europe was engulfed in World War I and the Russian Revolution. So it was with much cynicism that Huxley must have wrote his story in 1932 to debunk the naive fantasies that socialists and libertarians had that humanity would solve all economic and social ills and create a perfect society.Brave New World centers on the post-scarcity World State, where everything from reproduction and social interactions to education, work, entertainment are ruled by a rigid hierarchy, and society is separated into five genetically-engineered casts. Only the upper casts, the Alphas and Betas, are allowed to develop normally, while the lower Gammas, Deltas, and Epsilons fill the more menial tasks of society. Children are engineered in labs and raised in group facilities and the hypnopaedic method is used to condition children to accept their allotted roles in society and not question the status quo. Consumerism is at the core of this society, and individuality is considered an aberration that can be cured with the freely-available feel-good drug “soma”. This drug allows for harmless group bonding without the potential danger of religion or independent thoughts.The story begins with Bernard Marx, an Alpha Plus psychologist who somehow is not fully satisfied with his regimented and stress-free existence, and Lenina Crowne, a hatchery worker who is fairly content with life. Bernard insists on taking Lenina to a Reservation where some Savages are allowed to live in a state of simple existence, cut off from the wonders of the World State. Here they observe many strange and disturbing rituals conducted by the Savages, and encounter John, the son of a civilized women who became stranded on the Reservation and bore a child there. Bernard takes John back to civilization and becomes the toast of society, enjoying his celebrity status for parading around a Savage who has been ironically raised almost exclusively on Shakespeare’s works. The Savage becomes increasingly disturbed by the hedonistic and mindless society of the World State, which is at odds with the romantic and passionate ideals of Shakespeare. In particular, the vapid promiscuousness of Lenina shocks him. Eventually he causes various uproars and is brought before Mustafa Mond, the World Controller for Western Europe. John and Mustafa have a very profound debate on religion, morality, and the principles of the World State. In the end, John rejects the empty happiness of this society, and elects to go into self-imposed exile. However, he discovers that it is not so easy to escape the modern world, which refuses to leave him alone. Suffice to say, things don’t end well. This book owes a great debt to We by Yevgeny Zamyatin, which to me is a superior book, and George Orwell thought that Huxley was being dishonest when he claimed no knowledge of that book while writing Brave New World. And of course it will always be compared with that greatest of all totalitarian dystopias, George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four, which is a much more powerful book. Where Orwell feared the dangers of totalitarianism, total control of information and personal freedom, along with doublethink and newsspeak, Huxley was more worried about humanity succumbing to hedonism, rampant and emotionless promiscuity, and systematic brainwashing/conditioning of the populace.I think that all three books (We, Brave New World, Nineteen Eighty-Four) form a scathing critique of the dangers detailed above, each with a different perspective. For example, We and Nineteen Eighty-Four are clearly directed at the horrors of Russian totalitarianism, while Brave New World is more opposed to the excesses of capitalism, consumerism, and hedonism. And while the authors of We and Nineteen Eighty-Four could probably breath a sign of relief to some degree (posthumously) when the Iron Curtail and Soviet Union fell, in some ways Huxley's vision was the most accurate. What could be closer to the Brave New World of "feelies", soma, and endless entertainment than our current world of brain-dead Hollywood blockbusters, lowest-common-denominator reality TV shows, rampant drug use among both affluent and the poor, social media, ubiquitious digital devices, etc. Sure, the modern world is very far from being a utopia for all but the most wealthy and indolent, but each in our daily lives can escape to our own private fantasy worlds via an electronic device and close their eyes to the problems of the world.At the same time, though Huxley seems to have been most afraid of us losing our individuality in a flood of mind-numbing consumerism, I would say that hasn't really come about. The proliferation of the Internet has certainly allowed a great deal of trashy consumerism to spread around the world, but at the same time we are drowned in waves of different ideas and perspectives, so that people are probably more exposed to diverse ways of thinking now than they ever were at any point of history. So Mr. Huxley, were you right after all?Why the 3-star rating, you might ask? Well, this book was so relentlessly satirical and contemptuous of all the characters in the book in order to bludgeon its points home that I couldn't identify with anyone except the evil, super-urbane Mustafa Mond, whose arguments against culture, art, literature and individuality in favor of stability, uniformity, and brain-washing are remarkably convincing despite their obvious shortcomings. In particular, by making John such a foolish, misguided and unhappy individual, though he is one of the few champions of literature, individuality, and free thinking, it makes you wonder what Mr. Huxley wants us to think. Is he trying to get us to sympathize with Mustafa, or are we supposed to see through that and embrace the pained Savage who cannot tolerate this Brave New World of soma-induced happiness? I for one would much rather spend time with the World Controller than the Savage, who is unfortunately a self-punishing, Shakespeare-spouting nut-case. At least in the case of We and Nineteen Eighty-Four, we can fully sympathize with the downtrodden D-503 and Winston Smith as they are ground under by the juggernaught regimes that oppress them. So perhaps Mr. Huxley has outsmarted himself and his readers. Certainly this book is required reading for all serious readers of dystopian works, but for my money We and Nineteen Eighty-Four are better works of literature.
Brave New World by Aldous Huxley is a didactic dystopian novel published during the year 1932. This boldly prophetic novel sets out to predict the future of humanity. Now, more than 80 years later, it has proven itself as a masterpiece and will continue to through the years. This novel is a criticism to "consumerism" which Huxley rightly predicts as the motor of the future. The dystopia he created is a mirror of our own. Only that he exaggerates man's greatest need, the need to consume, which produces a very dreadful result. "It appears that the point of Brave New World is that modernity is developing in a direction that will ultimately change human nature itself. A world in which consumerism is developed to the extent it is in the World State, where desires are immediately gratified, in which “external secretion” is carried to the baby before it has barely begun to cry, would eradicate the most fundamental fact of human existence: its inconvenience." The main problem with most people who criticize this book is that they focus on the empirical differences of Huxley's dystopia and our reality. What an absurd thing to do! The focus should be on the trend of our society and its similarities to the idea of Huxley's dystopia. That the ultimate goal towards producing consumable things set to eliminate inconvenience will result to unending happiness and shallow contentment. It is not a bad thing in itself. But, if it is achieved in the near future, Truth (Science), Beauty (Art), and Religion would have no place in society. That there is no need for them in people who feel no inconvenience at all. That in a happily contented place, the only thing to be maintained is stability. That Science would be limited, Art unappreciated, and God unnoticed. This may seem far-fetched now, but it is not impossible. “Man is an intelligence, not served by, but in servitude to his organs.” The chapters 16 and 17 which reflect all these things I've said, are to me, the intellectual heart of the novel and thus the most important. In the end, the Savage's self conflagration (has Shakespeare written all over it) reflects that a sane man cannot live in a world crazed by the trend of a perfect consumer society. “The real hopeless victims of mental illness are to be found among those who appear to be most normal. "Many of them are normal because they are so well adjusted to our mode of existence, because their human voice has been silenced so early in their lives, that they do not even struggle or suffer or develop symptoms as the neurotic does." They are normal not in what may be called the absolute sense of the word; they are normal only in relation to a profoundly abnormal society. Their perfect adjustment to that abnormal society is a measure of their mental sickness. These millions of abnormally normal people, living without fuss in a society to which, if they were fully human beings, they ought not to be adjusted.” “I want God, I want poetry, I want danger, I want freedom, I want sin.”"In fact,' said Mustapha Mond, 'you're claiming the right to be unhappy."“All right then," said the savage defiantly, I'm claiming the right to be unhappy.""Not to mention the right to grow old and ugly and impotent; the right to have syphilis and cancer; the right to have too little to eat, the right to be lousy; the right to live in constant apprehension of what may happen tomorrow; the right to catch typhoid; the right to be tortured by unspeakable pains of every kind." There was a long silence."I claim them all," said the Savage at last.” “Did you eat something that didn't agree with you?" asked Bernard. The Savage nodded "I ate civilization.The perfect consumer society will cause us to lose our humanity. Perfection is not meant for the human. It is the imperfections that give meaning to our lives and it is the very thing that defines us."O wonder!How many goodly creatures are there here!How beauteous mankind is! O brave new worldThat has such people in't!" O brave new world! O brave new world! I wish I could say the same.
What do You think about Brave New World (1998)?
Mr Foster duly told them.Told them of the growing embryo on its bed of peritoneum. Made them taste the rich blood-surrogate on which it fed. Explained why it had to be stimulated with placentin and thyroxin. Told them of the corpus luteum extract. Showed them the jets through which at every twelfth metre from zero to 2040 it was automatically injected. Spoke of those gradually increasing doses of pituitary administered during the final ninety-six metres of their course. Described the artificial maternal circulation installed on every bottle at metres 112; showed them the reservoir of blood-surrogate, the centrifugal pump that kept the liquid moving over the placenta and drove it through the synthetic lung and waste-product filter.
—Emily May
In Brave New World, first published in 1932, Huxley paints the picture of a world that is willing to surrender true joy for a bland happiness free of suffering, that is willing to abandon truth for comfort, that is willing to eschew heights in order to avoid depths, and that is quick to surrender human ambition and individual personality for the sake of societal harmony. It is a frightening presentation, precisely because it does not seem too improbable. Even in the United States, which is one of the freest societies, people have come to rely increasingly upon the state. "Only a large-scale popular movement toward decentralization and self-help can arrest the present tendency toward statism," writes Huxley in his foreword to Brave New World. "A really efficient totalitarian state," continues Huxley, "would be one in which the all-powerful executive of political bosses and their army of managers control a population of slaves who do not have to be coerced, because they love their servitude. To make them love it is the task assigned . . . to ministries of propaganda, newspaper editors, and schoolteachers." This is a picture that sounds all to familiar to the modern day libertarian. Huxley's writing is not particularly impressive in and of itself; he has no special flowery gift when it comes to use of the English language, but he tells a mesmerizing story. Brave New World is a quick read, and it has a strong impact.
—Skylar Burris
remember that last semester of english class, senior year, where every class seemed painfully long and excrutiatingly pointless? when everybody sat around secretly thinking of cute and witty things to put in other people's yearbooks? when the teachers realized we were already braindead from filling out three dozen student loan applications and college housing forms? that's when honors english started getting a little lazy. not that i minded. everybody got a book list. then everybody got split up into groups. you were responsible for reading all the books on your own, but one in particular was chosen for your group to present at the end of the semester. you know--- as a refresher for the rest of the class. because of course EVERYONE was gonna read EVERY book.i can't remember what i did instead of reading "brave new world", but it was probably fun and involved copious amounts of sweet tea and a gigantic paper mache cow. fortunately it didn't matter because the only group to take their presentation seriously was the "brave new world" group, and the way they presented stuck with me long enough to compel me to read the book later.maybe it was the weird music they had playing during their presentation, maybe it was the fact that super hot chris mayns had to sit in my group (the alphas) but i was seriously attracted to the world this group created in our classroom. we drew cards randomly to determine our class, then sat accordingly and wore cute little colored wristbands. everybody got pez (soma!) and *gasp* a birth control belt. throughout the presentation people were moved next to someone and lost a packet on their belt (listen, this is scandalous for a bible belt high school, ok? by the way, i did NOT get to sit next to chris, which is probably good because i would have been mortified and choked on a pez) anyway, the presentation was fun, but i didn't get around to reading my (now ex) boyfriends copy until a year ago. and i started getting a small, evil thought exactly the same as i had in class so many years ago... maybe some people would actually like this system. maybe some people would actually BENEFIT from this system. people don't have to think? they aren't expected to do much, go to college, become something bigger than what they actually are? they're rewarded with good feeling drugs? they are proud to have accomplished what they have? and they... DON'T HAVE TO THINK FOR THEMSELVES!?I know i'm going to get slammed for saying this later, especially because i never do actual reviews or completely delve into what i'm thinking (so shoot me) but haven't you ever been roaming the world wide inter-web and found a little troller you thought "well, this person is a poor use of a human brain?" yes, you have. admit it.just think, a little test tube tweaking and that person wouldn't mind manning the cash register at piggly wiggly for the rest of his life, saving the rest of humanity from noxious online rants about the hotness of avril lavinge and the brilliance of starcraft (apparently its a video game thats KOOLER THAN U!!!!1#)you're tempted, i can tell...
—Erin
