4) One of the most difficult questions to answer about this book is why all of this is so very bad. Many people have described Huxley’s vision of the future as “horrifying.” However, the fact remains that everyone in the society is really happy, really content, really without war, or pain, or suffering. So what’s so bad about it, “really”? It’s often an easy answer to feel but a difficult one to verbalize. Respond to this issue. If you want to say it’s not so bad, and you really mean it, that is all right, too. Just be specific and thoughtful.
I think it comes down to two things: how shallow you are and the Savage's argument that I explained from the last blog. Really shallow people, who only care about material and physical pleasure wouldn't find this society bad at all. The society offers everything except intellectual freedom, and people who like to think would find it restrictive because of the lack of mental opportunity. Physical pleasure overload is not the same thing as mental happiness. A botanist may feel happier sitting in poison ivy in the middle of some forsaken wilderness without any comforts of civilization than in a luxury hotel with five-course meals and free massages. Sure, the poor dude will get rashes and frostbite and maybe depression from being alone and a sprained ankle or two, but hey, he discovered an all-new species of mushroom, which is worth the world to him much more than any luxury hotel could be. That kind of happiness is what the society of Brave New World lacks, and it is why it is only restrictive to those who are deeper mentally and want something more than just physical/material pleasures. They don't get to think or explore new things or experience intellectual satisfaction, and that is what is restrictive and 'bad' about the society. It's like being shown the cover of a book you think could be really interesting, or a song you think you might like, or a movie you think you want to see, but being denied the chance to ever read it, or listen to it, or see it. Or sometimes you just want to watch any movie, or read any book, or listen to anything, but you can't and you don't know why, and they serve you pie and an aphrodisiac instead. A shallower person might be like, cool, pie and sex! or whatever, but you're not. You're different and want more than physical freedom. (Which they have. Nobody directly tried to stop the Savage from doing whatever he wanted, or tried to make that one girl who was forced to live on the Reservation to come back).
Friday 30 January 2009
Brave New World Post III
3) In chapter 17, Mustapha Mond and John Savage discuss civilization. John says two startling things: “What you need is something with tears for a change. Nothing costs enough here” and “But I don’t want comfort. I want God, I want poetry, I want real danger, I want freedom, I want goodness. I want sin.” Read this interchange carefully and then put Mond and Savage’s arguments into your own words.
Mond's argument: There is no need for anything besides the overindulged safety and happiness that people now enjoy. Nobility, heroism, God, stuff like that, has no place because there is no bad thing to be heroic against, no honour to uphold for nobility, no need for a God who punishes and rewards because everyone is rewarded, everyone is the same, everyone knows what to do and how to do it and there is no conflict. Since there is no conflict, everyone is happy. And how can something that makes everyone happy be wrong? Therefore, it must be right and everything else formerly considered to be right is just old-fashioned and obsolete and no longer applies to 'today's' reality.
The Savage's argument: There is a world of quotes, arguments, books and people out there who can support the Savage's argument, but I think that the Savage's argument can be basically summed up in the words of the saying: 'you cannot know happiness until you have known sadness' (or something like that, anyway). Basically, the Savage is saying that nobody is truly happy because they don't appreciate their happiness, they don't have to earn it, they don't understand it and they are missing out on the whole human experience by never being anything but happy. Everything bad has a purpose, even if its only purpose is to make the good seem that much better. How much more would these people enjoy their soma than if they lived today, in an anti-drug culture? How much more would they enjoy their promiscuity than if they lived in a Puritan society? They would love their technology more if they were forced to live in the Middle Ages. They would appreciate much more if they understood and stuff, but they don't. The Savage is saying, sure they're happy, but their happiness is pointless and not as good as it might be.
Mond's argument: There is no need for anything besides the overindulged safety and happiness that people now enjoy. Nobility, heroism, God, stuff like that, has no place because there is no bad thing to be heroic against, no honour to uphold for nobility, no need for a God who punishes and rewards because everyone is rewarded, everyone is the same, everyone knows what to do and how to do it and there is no conflict. Since there is no conflict, everyone is happy. And how can something that makes everyone happy be wrong? Therefore, it must be right and everything else formerly considered to be right is just old-fashioned and obsolete and no longer applies to 'today's' reality.
The Savage's argument: There is a world of quotes, arguments, books and people out there who can support the Savage's argument, but I think that the Savage's argument can be basically summed up in the words of the saying: 'you cannot know happiness until you have known sadness' (or something like that, anyway). Basically, the Savage is saying that nobody is truly happy because they don't appreciate their happiness, they don't have to earn it, they don't understand it and they are missing out on the whole human experience by never being anything but happy. Everything bad has a purpose, even if its only purpose is to make the good seem that much better. How much more would these people enjoy their soma than if they lived today, in an anti-drug culture? How much more would they enjoy their promiscuity than if they lived in a Puritan society? They would love their technology more if they were forced to live in the Middle Ages. They would appreciate much more if they understood and stuff, but they don't. The Savage is saying, sure they're happy, but their happiness is pointless and not as good as it might be.
Brave New World Blog II
2) Comment on the purpose of sex, games, and sayings like “ending is better than mending” in the book. How are all of these things used as a method of control?
The first two are used to keep people happy. If people are happy, then there is no need to think or desire to rebel/attempt reform. Happy people do not want change because there is no need, and change might make things worse. As long as the majority is willing to peacefully abide by the status quo, the people in control can stay in control and the controlled people do their happy things and everyone has a great life. According to their definition of a great life, anyway.
Also, all three are meant to enrich the economy. As long as people want sex, they will also want stuff to go with it, and will go to their version of the movies ('feelies') and stuff to impress possible mates, and so forth. Games involve spectators, transportation, equipment, uniforms, snacks...etc., and that stimulates the economy and keeps the money going in the right direction. Sayings like 'ending is better than mending' help serve the same purpose- they instill in a person the desire (indirectly) to stimulate the economy; by buying new instead of reusing/fixing/mending, etc. A good economy keeps the people happy and the people on top rich...and everyone's still overjoyed and desiring the status quo!
Also, the sayings (obviously) tell people what to do/believe/say so that the society automatically conforms to the Controller's intentions. This is a not-so-subtle and extremely-effective direct form of control- over minds.
The first two are used to keep people happy. If people are happy, then there is no need to think or desire to rebel/attempt reform. Happy people do not want change because there is no need, and change might make things worse. As long as the majority is willing to peacefully abide by the status quo, the people in control can stay in control and the controlled people do their happy things and everyone has a great life. According to their definition of a great life, anyway.
Also, all three are meant to enrich the economy. As long as people want sex, they will also want stuff to go with it, and will go to their version of the movies ('feelies') and stuff to impress possible mates, and so forth. Games involve spectators, transportation, equipment, uniforms, snacks...etc., and that stimulates the economy and keeps the money going in the right direction. Sayings like 'ending is better than mending' help serve the same purpose- they instill in a person the desire (indirectly) to stimulate the economy; by buying new instead of reusing/fixing/mending, etc. A good economy keeps the people happy and the people on top rich...and everyone's still overjoyed and desiring the status quo!
Also, the sayings (obviously) tell people what to do/believe/say so that the society automatically conforms to the Controller's intentions. This is a not-so-subtle and extremely-effective direct form of control- over minds.
Brave New World Blog I
1) Obviously, none of Huxley’s predictions have come true exactly. For that matter, none of The Jetson’s or Back to the Future’s predictions have come true exactly. Predicting the future is a tricky business, whether done seriously or in jest. However, there are elements of truth in Huxley’s vision of the world. Discuss some of these. Which aspects of Brave New World’s society seemed most relevant in 2009? Which most far-fetched? Why?
My version of Brave New World actually has a second book, BNW Revisited, attached to it, by the same author. It's basically a comparison of 1965 and the society of Brave New World. It's dense but kind of interesting.
Anyway. Some of the most far-fetched and unrealistic aspects of the Brave New World society are the free-for-all sexual attitude, the mass 'Bokanovskifying', the hypnopaedia and the World State. The first is unrealistic in today's world because there are a lot of 'conservative' (not in the sense of Republican vs Democrat political kind, more like the people who are more for family values and that sort of thing, even not fanatically or anything. Basically anyone who disapproves strongly of the promiscuous morality of Brave New World.) people who wouldn't stand for that kind of loosening of society's 'morality'. That kind of general, public promsicuouity (sp?) isn't likely to happen because even more 'liberal' people would think of it as a bit odd or wrong somehow.
I think we mentioned in class why the World State would be unrealistic in today's world. Basically, the world is too full of diverse cultures, people, governments and opinions to make such a World State be able to function. Imagine the Civil War (diversity between South and North) on a global scale. What a nightmare. Though I doubt any of the current governments would want to give up their nationality and independence (word from Dean's class: sovereignty!) to be ruled by some dude from somewhere else.
The mass-production of people won't happen because again there will be more 'conservative' (less progressive people, NOT in a bad way, most of us could be included here) people who will not want to sully the value of an individual or something by mass-producing them like cars. Also, nobody in their right mind would even dare suggest lowering the mental and physical standards of individuals in order to cram them into a caste system. At least in this country, anyway.
The hypnopaedia 'sleepteaching' is the same. Our society freaks out at the least accusation of corrupting people with subliminal advertising and whatnot. Brainwashing on any scale is probably actually a crime somewhere and I doubt (in this country) such a thing could happen on that large a scale. (Some mad scientist or dude somewhere could maybe secretly brainwash a few people or something, but certainly not the whole country).
Something that seems similar/relevant to today is the general cultural prejudice against thinking. Everybody nowadays gets jumped on for saying what they think because it 'offends someone' or is 'politically incorrect' or is too 'liberal' or 'conservative' or 'unpatriotic' or 'unsupportive' or whatever. If you're not generally considered to be right, then everybody hates your opinion. And nobody wants to actually hear what's going on. So nobody says what they think and nobody cares.
Also, the condescending attitude towards the Savages in BNW is similar to our society. Unfortunately, anytime we perceive someone/thing/place to be worse or more primitive or inferior or whatever in any way to ours, we demean it, consider it less worthy of respect and admiration and understanding.
My version of Brave New World actually has a second book, BNW Revisited, attached to it, by the same author. It's basically a comparison of 1965 and the society of Brave New World. It's dense but kind of interesting.
Anyway. Some of the most far-fetched and unrealistic aspects of the Brave New World society are the free-for-all sexual attitude, the mass 'Bokanovskifying', the hypnopaedia and the World State. The first is unrealistic in today's world because there are a lot of 'conservative' (not in the sense of Republican vs Democrat political kind, more like the people who are more for family values and that sort of thing, even not fanatically or anything. Basically anyone who disapproves strongly of the promiscuous morality of Brave New World.) people who wouldn't stand for that kind of loosening of society's 'morality'. That kind of general, public promsicuouity (sp?) isn't likely to happen because even more 'liberal' people would think of it as a bit odd or wrong somehow.
I think we mentioned in class why the World State would be unrealistic in today's world. Basically, the world is too full of diverse cultures, people, governments and opinions to make such a World State be able to function. Imagine the Civil War (diversity between South and North) on a global scale. What a nightmare. Though I doubt any of the current governments would want to give up their nationality and independence (word from Dean's class: sovereignty!) to be ruled by some dude from somewhere else.
The mass-production of people won't happen because again there will be more 'conservative' (less progressive people, NOT in a bad way, most of us could be included here) people who will not want to sully the value of an individual or something by mass-producing them like cars. Also, nobody in their right mind would even dare suggest lowering the mental and physical standards of individuals in order to cram them into a caste system. At least in this country, anyway.
The hypnopaedia 'sleepteaching' is the same. Our society freaks out at the least accusation of corrupting people with subliminal advertising and whatnot. Brainwashing on any scale is probably actually a crime somewhere and I doubt (in this country) such a thing could happen on that large a scale. (Some mad scientist or dude somewhere could maybe secretly brainwash a few people or something, but certainly not the whole country).
Something that seems similar/relevant to today is the general cultural prejudice against thinking. Everybody nowadays gets jumped on for saying what they think because it 'offends someone' or is 'politically incorrect' or is too 'liberal' or 'conservative' or 'unpatriotic' or 'unsupportive' or whatever. If you're not generally considered to be right, then everybody hates your opinion. And nobody wants to actually hear what's going on. So nobody says what they think and nobody cares.
Also, the condescending attitude towards the Savages in BNW is similar to our society. Unfortunately, anytime we perceive someone/thing/place to be worse or more primitive or inferior or whatever in any way to ours, we demean it, consider it less worthy of respect and admiration and understanding.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
