Aldous Huxley - Brave New World - Page 2 - Writers Forum

PaPa · 02-23-2006, 11:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike C

It doesn't matter what tools you use to control people - if you take away free will you take away humanity.

Personally I find the idea of enforced stupidity (by depriving the fetus of oxygen) as a means of social control far more terrifying than a totalitarian regime.

That's kind of the point. *You* find it terrifying. I find it terrifying. Everyone probably finds it terrifying. The point is, no one in the BNW finds it so, and thus everyone is happy. The central premise of hirshmon's argument is that, as our mindset would not exist, our opinions about what is right and wrong are irrelevant to the happiness of the inhabitants of the BNW.

I still wouldn't like to live in the BNW, nor see it come about, but what I feel doesn't matter when considering the viability of the social model.

Mike C · 02-23-2006, 12:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PaPa

That's kind of the point. *You* find it terrifying. I find it terrifying. Everyone probably finds it terrifying. The point is, no one in the BNW finds it so, and thus everyone is happy. The central premise of hirshmon's argument is that, as our mindset would not exist, our opinions about what is right and wrong are irrelevant to the happiness of the inhabitants of the BNW.

But that so obviously denies the purpose of the book - it's not written for or by inhabitants of the BNW, but is a commentary on our world and by extension the human condition. Hirshmon argues that, if properly conditioned, he would be happy to clean toilets. I argue that that very conditioning would render Hirshmon less than human.

Quote:

I still wouldn't like to live in the BNW, nor see it come about, but what I feel doesn't matter when considering the viability of the social model.

But the book is not about the social model as much as how humans fit within it (or not) and what it does to them. The fact that we agree that the prospect would be terrifying has to suggest that on a visceral level this model is terribly, terribly wrong. As wrong, in fact, as the Hindu caste system or the English class sytem, on which the book was modelled.

hirshmon · 02-23-2006, 11:34 PM

But my argument doesn't pertain to humanity...it pertains to enjoyment. I realize that people in the BNW are robbed of their humanity and free will and creativity...but that doesn't make them any less happy.

A Glass Thought · 02-24-2006, 03:41 AM

The problem with the whole thing is our own view pertaining humanity and our rights as individuals. In BNW, the populace has no choice as to what caste they are born into, just like we no choice whether we are born in London or the Congo. So whether they like cleaning toilets or not is besides the point.
The problem lies in what the overall view of humanity is. Is it freedom of thought and choice? Or are we just one of the numerous species that live on this planet. The caste system in BNW only favors who ever sits at the very top, since that is where the whole process originates, and it is from that person or persons, that this utopian/dystopian society was created.
Like Hirshman said, we are conditioned just like the people in BNW are, just we don't notice it either. Now, while that doesn't make it right, it does make it a fact of life. The difference being whether conditioning happens at random, or along a precise schedule to benefit the society as a whole. Simply put: Would you give up certain abilities that you consider rights in order to move towards a stronger, more perfect humanity? The truth is, you already do. Brave New World just takes it to the next level.
The people in the story still contain humanity and at least a basic moral code, which is why they rely so heavily of drugs to help wipe away time and freedom from thought.
I'm talking in circles.
I guess the best question you could ask is what future would you prefer: 1984 or Brave New World? Because we're headed somewhere between the two.

Mike C · 02-24-2006, 04:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A Glass Thought

I guess the best question you could ask is what future would you prefer: 1984 or Brave New World? Because we're headed somewhere between the two.

A question that occurred to me also. I'd actually see 1984 as the starting point and BNW as the conclusion. In 1984 you already have the caste system with the proles at the bottom - anaesthatised by cheap beer and gin, automated machine-generated pop music and novels (hey, we already have that part!) - and a controlling class, with Winston Smith somewhere in the middle. Newspeak is the social conditioning device in 1984 that is achieved chemically in BNW.

And I'd agree that we're heading down that road. England has always had a class sytem, except now the lower working class have been largely replaced by immigrants. The US is possibly more polarised than ever between the haves and have-nots, with hispanics taking the place of the proles.

Yes, we are subject to conditioning, and yes, we are daily trading (or having traded for us by Governments) personal liberties in exchange for a percieved brave new world of personal safety, and no, I don't like it. The biggest damage Al-Qaida did to western society on 9/11, and again in London last year, was not the destruction of life and property, but the opening of doors for government to implement draconian social controls that would have been unthinkable before in the name of freedom and security.

Quote:

Originally Posted by hirshmon

But my argument doesn't pertain to humanity...it pertains to enjoyment. I realize that people in the BNW are robbed of their humanity and free will and creativity...but that doesn't make them any less happy.

I don't remember the lower castes in BNW being happy, or enjoying their lives. Just unable to cogitate sufficiently to question their existance. How about you, H? If every time you're unhappy we crank down your IQ a few notches until you're in a state of perpetual bliss - would you find that desirable?

A Glass Thought · 02-24-2006, 04:47 AM

I guess a more relevant question considering the lower classes in BNW is if you had to chance to obtain the answers to everything you ever wanted to know, would you? Even if the answers made you miserable?

It's a basic assumption that if the guys on top know all these things, yet are stressed and unhappy all the time, wouldn't it be better to just not know at all. But from the other point of view, you'd do anything to get answers, because you think they will make you happy.
Could this be considered a flaw in human nature itself?

Mike C · 02-24-2006, 08:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A Glass Thought

Could this be considered a flaw in human nature itself?

Interesting question. If ambition and the thirst for knowledge are flaws, then yes. But I think they're the opposite. It's that thirst that sent Marco Polo across asia, made Galileo risk being charged with heresy, made Columbus cross the atlantic, put men on the moon...

It is possibly the essence of humanity to strive for something more, to reach for the stars even while sitting in the gutter. If we deny ourselves that, we're no better than rats in a maze.

A Glass Thought · 02-24-2006, 09:37 AM

That's true, it is our nature to strive for more, which in essence, is what Brave New World is about. They strived for Utopia, the consequences be damned.

But what happens when we reach the end of the line, and aren't satisfied? If we finally got to ask God what the meaning of life was, and he says "I got bored. What's that? No, there's no heaven, sorry, this is the end of the road for you people." How could we react? Naturally, we would be happier never knowing. Just like a child wants to be an adult, unaware that it leads to responsibility, and a step closer to death. All the while the adult wishes to be a child, to be carefree and unrestrained by life's burdens.
Maybe I'm looking at this wrong, and our paradoxal behavior is not a consequence of humanity, but a consequence of mortality.

Mike C · 02-26-2006, 04:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A Glass Thought

Maybe I'm looking at this wrong, and our paradoxal behavior is not a consequence of humanity, but a consequence of mortality.

I think they're the same thing. We are the only species obsessed with posterity.

A Glass Thought · 02-28-2006, 03:58 PM

This is true.

SteMcGrath · 08-15-2007, 02:06 PM

I think brave BNW is a horrific indictment of a futuristic society! They're walking dead with no real happiness or pain (I'm certainly not pro pain) but us humans can only write literature and poetry etc; because we've been given (or not) the intellegence to feel suffering, pain, love, anger and without this; humanity would be a mere sea of pointless creatures. Obviously you can argue that we dont have much purpose; but personal relationships do give people's lives some meaning. Most literature (I haven't read them all) on utopia always results in the human spirit sufficing. I'm sure when we're in personal despair it can become a pleasent prospect, but in reality it's sinister.

Stewart · 08-16-2007, 01:10 AM

Since reading Brave New World, I've also read We by Yevgeny Zamyatin. This is the dystopian novel that inspired Huxley and Rand to write their own versions. Orwell apparently claimed ignorance of it.

Ben · 08-16-2007, 03:24 AM

Not so sure about Orwell claiming ignorance, if the notes from my copy of 1984 are anything to go by:

"As a child Orwell was fascinated by H. G. Wells's Modern Utopia. He told Jacintha Buddicom that he might one day write a similar type of book. He was introduced to Yevgeny Zamyatin's We by Gleb Struve, and he told him on 17 February 1944, 'I am interested in that kind of book, and even keep making notes for one myself that may get written sooner or later.'"

I'm guessing there are sources out there which counter this though, but I'm more inclined to believe the book.

Patrick Beverley · 08-16-2007, 11:35 AM

Overall, I'd say Nineteen Eighty-Four is better written, but certain key sections of Brave New World are more horrifying than anything Orwell wrote.

In particular, the prologue of Brave New World makes a deep impression, probably because it's children having things done to them. That hits a place Room 101 can't reach. The real strength of Nineteen Eighty-Four is the relationship between Winston and Julia.

ToPrint · 08-16-2007, 12:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by talknerdytome

I've just started reading this, and I cannot make my mind up on whether I like it or not.

Has anybody else read it? What did they think?

\

Brave New World is a Must Read. And actually, I've been thinking of the book a lot lately. More and more, I encounter people who hate reading and who only watch TV or play video games. This reminds me of the book's ending a bit. I don't want to ruin anything in case you're still reading. But if you want we to elaborate when you done, just let me know.

Lisa