Category: Brave New World

Introduction

The government institution has a tendency of using anything that is in its disposal to ensure that it is in control through hook and crook. This includes to some extent cases whereby the government uses technology to manipulate its subjects and ensure a severe handling of any disloyalty issues.

The books ‘1984’ by George Orwell, ‘Brave New World’ by Aldous Huxley and ‘A clockwork orange’ by Antony Burgess portray a common way in the manner in which governments use technology and other resources to manipulate its citizens both physically and psychologically. The paper analyzes successfully the manner in which the three playwrights develop the theme of government manipulation in the three texts with an effort of portraying the common results attained.

Manipulation in George Orwell’s ‘1984’

Having been set in 1949, the novel ‘1984’ was a prediction of what could happen to a country where totalitarianism became deeply rooted (Hillegas 43). The novel portrays the cruelties and oppression of citizens who were subjects of a totalitarian government of Oceania. The novel is mostly concerned about the manner in which technology has been employed to oppress citizens by regimes as well as establish control over every aspect of their lives therefore making them remain like slaves (Aubrey 50).

In the portrayal of what people can call the perfect totalitarian government, the novel examines the different techniques that the party uses to control its citizens. These include psychological manipulation of the citizens, exercising physical control on the people, and using technology to control information, history and the citizens for the benefit of the party.

The party exercises psychological control over its people by replacing individual thought with distorted psychological stimuli. The use of propaganda ensures a constant feeding of the people with lies that in turn shape their thinking (Aubrey 23).

The use of ‘Telescreens’ to enhance the propaganda is effective in that the citizens are kept aware that the authorities are scrutinizing them. “You had to live — did live, from habit that became instinct — in the assumption that every sound you made was overheard, and, except in darkness, every movement scrutinized” (Orwell 5).

This ensures that every move to be disloyal even by simply having a disloyal thought is completely dealt with and can be viewed as a crime against the party.

The citizens seem turned against each other using propaganda. For instance, children seem turned against their parents and recruited in the organization referred to as junior spies where they can act as watchdogs for the party by reporting any disloyalty even from their parents. People consider those who go against the party as enemies of the state.

The party employs physical control in its efforts to exert completely the control on its citizens (Bowker 220). This is evident through the manner which the party takes control of the bodies of its subjects.

As Winston observes, the party can read a tiny facial twitch to mean disloyalty, which could lead to arrest and prosecution. “Your worst enemy, he reflected, was your nervous system. At any moment the tension inside you was liable to translate itself into some visible symptom” (Orwell 211).

In fact, the party issues decree that force the subjects of the state to undergo mass morning exercises, which it refers to as the physical jerks. They also encounter situations of long working hours at government agencies. For those who try to go against this, he/she has to face punishment and ‘reeducated’ through a severe tortured.

Winston says, “People simply disappeared, always during the night. People removed your name from the registers wiping out every record of everything you had ever done, and further denying and forgetting your one-time existence. You were abolished, annihilated: vaporized was the usual word” (Orwell 345). As Winston points out after he was subjected to this torture, the state takes advantage of it to control reality and suppress opposition as there is nothing more intense to a human being like physical pain.

The party uses technology to control both information and history by changing all documented truth and replacing it with propaganda. The government prohibits keeping of historical evidence, such as photographs. These leave the people with only one choice, which is to rely upon their memories for the truth (Aubrey 56). This makes them easily manipulated.

The party abuses technology, as it uses it to enhance the control and oppressive measures of the government. The party ensures that there are the telescopes and microphones hidden all across the city to keep a close eye on the citizens.

According to Bowker, this deprives them of their privacy and personal freedoms as every of their moves is monitored (230). Technology seem further used to exert control on the production and sources of information as well as inflicting torture on those who are deemed disloyal. This proves that technology when in the wrong hands can facilitate the most diabolical of evils.

Manipulation in ‘Brave New world’

Huxley in his brave new world sounds a warning on what may transpire upon giving the state a control over new and powerful scientific innovations and technology. This is because the state is bound to use them in manipulating the citizens. This can be witnessed in the manner the state uses “technology and medical interventions to control reproduction” (Huxley 45).

Another example stands out where the state uses technology to create the complicated entertainment machines and the complicated drug soma that is prove of such misuse of technology.

Brave new world is not only a warning but also a satire of the society in which Huxley is part. In this state, society’s economic values determine what a person’s happiness entails. A person is therefore happy if they can satisfy their personal needs (Howe 89). The society has influenced the psychology of the citizens to equate success to the ability to grow economically and prosper.

The citizens therefore spent most of their time enjoying themselves as well as looking for ways to attain pleasure at the expense of their personal liberty about which they are less concerned.

Like ‘1984’ by George Orwell, ‘Brave new world’ sends a warning by depicting a dystopia in which a totalitarian government controls the movements, bodies, minds and actions of its people in order to preserve itself and continue being in power (Aubrey 56).

The kind of manipulation is however different in the two texts in that rather than the constant surveillance, torture and murders illustrated by Orwell’s 1984, brave New world achieves the same by manipulating people indirectly through technological interventions that exist throughout the lifetime of the citizens and shape what they deem as important to them.

This makes the people so happy and satisfied to an extent that they do not think about the possibility of the oppression they seem subjected to (Meyers 64). This in other words is that they are kept satisfied to an extent that they are no longer concerned about their personal freedom.

Manipulation in ‘A Clockwork Orange’

Burgess’s belief that the freedom of choice is the most important human attribute that a person can have and that distinguishes humans from all other things in the world which include both machines and animals is the major concern of this book (Meyers 56). When the character Alex exercises his free will by choosing to do evil things, the government represses his quest.

Upon doing this, he ends up losing his ability to function as a man and he therefore exists as only a thing. The minister says, “If a man cannot choose, he ceases to be a man” (Burgess 88). He loses his free will due to the manipulation of the government as well as its meddling with affairs of individuals.

Neutrality and apathy as preached by oppressive governments become the two greatest enemies of free will (Meyers 45). As exemplified in the novel by Alex’s parents who choose not to meddle in the affairs of the state but are lured into sleep by a world cast program, the state uses such mechanism as entertainment to invoke apathy and neutrality in its middle class and make them comfortable and not in a position to question anything whatsoever. There freedom is therefore taken “as they sleep” (Burgess 70) as Alex puts it.

The institution of government as portrayed in the novel which champions for free will constantly seeks to suppress individuals in favor of the majority (Howe 564).

The state is desperate to the extent that it can employ any method to ensure that it survives. By the use of technology, economy as well as the threat of violent measures, the state is able to manipulate the individual as well as take away his free will. The state values someone or something when it matters and when it is of great importance only to drop it and discard it later when it thinks it is of less importance.

“Common criminals like this unsavory crowd”–(that meant me, brothers, as well as the others, who were real pre-stoop-nicks and treacherous with it)–“can best be dealt with on a purely curative bas” (Burgess 78). It uses technology to make hardened criminals harmless and then turns against the dissidents such as Alexander whose public opinion threatens the stability of the state.

Conclusion

The three texts in their different contexts explore the theme of manipulation by government and the effect that this has to the individual citizens. The manner in which these governments use technology as well as manipulate the economy to attain this is similar in all the three texts.

Technology for instance, is used in all the texts to suppress any instability either by directly barring the citizens from this or indirectly. This can be seen for instance the manner in which the use of advanced technology is put in place to ensure that all the hardened criminals are made harmless in ‘A clockwork orange’ and also to ‘reeducate’ enemies of the party in ‘1984’.

This implies the direct abuse of technology by state machinery to exert torture and ensure that people do not challenge the government’s policies. However, ‘Brave New world’ uses a different approach in the manner it uses technology to exercise control on its citizens.

It ensures the production of entertainment and luxury machines, which make the citizens so occupied and happy to the extent that they cannot possibly think of themselves as oppressed. Whichever the manner of using technology to manipulate the citizens, the results are all the same: It must manipulate people, robbing off their rights and personal freedom.

Works Cited

Aubrey, Crispin. Nineteen Eighty-Four in 1984 and Brave New world: Autonomy, Control and Communication. London: Comedia, 1983.

Burgess, Anthony. Clockwork Oranges: In 1985. London: Hutchinson, 1985.

Bowker, Gordon . Inside George Orwell: A Biography. Palgrave: Macmillan, 2003.

Hillegas, Mark. The Future As Nightmare: H.G. Wells and the Anti-Utopians. Southern Illinois: University Press, 1967.

Howe, Irving. 1984, Brave New world and Clockwork oranges Revisited: Totalitarianism In Our Century. New York: Harper Row, 1985.

Huxley, Aldous. Brave New World. London: HarperCollins, 1932. p. 113

Meyers, Jeffery. Orwell, Burgess and Huxley: Wintry Conscience of a Generation. London: Norton Publishers, 2000.

Orwell, George. Nineteen Eighty-Four: A novel. London: Secker & Warburg, 1949.

Introduction

In his dystopian novel “Brave New World,” Aldous Huxley imagines a society where government and technology rule over the populace. The author wants the reader to comprehend the risks posed by a society that prioritizes security and contentment over personal autonomy and independence. Huxley promotes awareness of the negative effects of excessive governmental meddling, materialism, and the erosion of human values. The narrative also emphasizes the negative effects of unregulated scientific advancement and how they affect society. The author wants to alert the reader to the possible hazards of a culture that values pleasure and uniformity over individuality and fulfillment.

Scientific and Technological Developments

In the novel, the World State has achieved stability and prosperity through genetic engineering, mass production, and conditioning. The primary assertion in the novel is that the cost of this stability is the loss of individuality, creativity, and genuine human connection. Huxley wrote, “it is better that one should suffer than that many should be corrupted” (148). It signifies that people are conditioned to accept their predetermined societal roles, and if they do not like one, they had better suffer. This dystopian society is depicted as terrifying and plausible because it is based on the genuine scientific and technological advancements of Huxley’s time, such as genetics and mass production. It is a cautionary tale about the dangers of these advancements if left unchecked.

Huxley’s use of vivid and dystopian imagery in “Brave New World” contributes to the novel’s sense of terror and plausibility. For example, the description of the Bokanovsky Process, in which thousands of identical embryos are produced from a single egg, is disgusting and plausible (Kang 6). This process creates a caste system in which each individual has a predetermined societal place based on intelligence, physical ability, and social status (Kang 15). This dehumanizing process warns against the dangers of eugenics and the idea of creating a “perfect” society through genetic engineering.

The second assertion poses that Huxley sees how science and technology have the potential to be used for great good and be destroyed at the same time. He claims: “we can’t allow science to undo its own good work” (Huxley 227). The book explores the dangers of a society that uses science and tech to control its citizens, sacrificing their freedom and creativity. It shows how a civilization, through genetic engineering, mass production, and conditioning, can create a caste system and control the population, revealing the risks of unchecked scientific progress.

Consumerism Society

Furthermore, the author asserts that there are effects of consumerism, mass media, and drugs on society. In the World State, consumerism maintains social stability, as individuals are encouraged to take pleasure in acquiring and consuming goods. The mass media is used to control the masses and promote the World State’s values. Society is supplied with drugs that keep them contented and suppressed; thus, they conform to being controlled (Claeys 57). Huxley portrays a dystopian society where control and manipulation restrict critical thinking, deep emotions and authentic human connections. It can be found in these words: “Actual happiness always looks pretty squalid in comparison with the overcompensations for misery.” (Huxley 165). Huxley shows that control and manipulation techniques can lead to a society where individuals cannot think critically or experience genuine human connection.

Oppression

The last assertion is aimed to show that people should go against the dangers of an ever-growing community. Most characters are portrayed as content and futuristic amidst the crisis occurring in society. They are not bothered by the way they are governed at all. The author clears his assertions regarding people’s perceptions and attitudes toward oppression. Huxley mentions: “one believes things because one has been conditioned to believe them” (288). This signifies that society has conformed to oppression; people do not mind being controlled as long as they are happy.

Based on the novel, society and people generally focus on their respective futures and thus care less about the challenges they are forced to endure. The author fears that with this attitude, people will begin to disregard the truth, making it lose meaning and become irrelevant (Kang 254). This will consequently signify the beginning of the end, where people and society will be destroyed by the things they love the most. According to Kang, Huxley asserts that “history is bunk,” by this, he implies that society has disregarded its past and has become unaware of life and all it pertains to (36). People have been led to live this way without realizing they are caged.

Critique

Aldous Huxley’s “Brave New World” is a dystopian novel that has captured the imagination of readers for nearly a century. The novel raises one of the essential assertions about the dangers of unchecked technological progress and the consequences of giving up our freedoms in exchange for security and stability (Kang 15). The controller explains, “You’ve got to choose between happiness and what people used to call high art. We’ve sacrificed the high art” (Kang 245). However, some critics argue that the novel is overly pessimistic and disregards the potential benefits of scientific and technological advancements.

One of the main criticisms of the novel is that it needs to be more focused on individual freedoms. Hence, the other assertion addressed relates to the social and economic factors that contribute to the formation of dystopias. It can be found in these words: “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.” (Huxley 220). While Huxley’s critique of the loss of individual identity and free will is certainly compelling, it overlooks the more prominent systemic factors contributing to the formation of oppressive and dystopian societies (Kang 102). The novel lacks consideration of inequality and poverty and disregards people trading freedom for stability and security in the face of poverty and political unrest.

Bernard Marx’s character represents Huxley’s criticism of the concept of a happy life in The World State. Through Bernard’s reactions to the concept of a happy life in The World State, Huxley criticizes the idea that control by the state can create happiness for everyone, “Huxley criticizes or opposes utopia’s.” (Zubaidillah 11). Huxley uses Bernard Marx to emphasize the importance of individual freedom and human rights. The World State uses soma to maintain stability, but Bernard represents the rejection of this control. “And Huxley in his book Brave New World, criticizes The World State with the ways of control one of them is soma.” (Zubaidillah 10). This highlights Huxley’s criticism of the World State’s use of soma to maintain stability at the cost of individuality.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Aldous Huxley’s “Brave New World” is a dystopian novel that is both plausible and terrible. The author uses vivid imagery, critiques of the dangers of scientific and technological progress, and critiques of consumerism and oppression to create a frighteningly possible world. Huxley warns against the dangers of sacrificing an individual for stability and conformity. He encourages readers to consider the consequences of a society that values efficiency and control over human dignity and individuality. He raises important questions about the dangers of unchecked technological progress and the consequences of giving up our freedoms. However, the novel is not without its flaws, and it has been criticized for its oversimplification of the complexities of human behavior, the political and economic systems that shape our lives, and the concept of happiness.

Works Cited

Claeys, Gregory. “Dystopia.” The Palgrave Handbook of Utopian and Dystopian Literatures. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2022. 53-64.

Huxley, Aldous. Brave New World. Harper Perennial, 2006.

Kang, Adelaide. Brave New World: Aldous Huxley. Wincsoft, 2018.

Zubaidillah, Haris. “SOCIAL AND POLITICAL IDEAS OF ALDOUS HUXLEY THROUGH BERNARD MARX’S CHARACTER IN BRAVE NEW WORLD.”, 2019.

Introduction

Authored by Aldous Huxley in 1932, Brave New World is a must-read fascinating chef-d’oeuvre that features the manager of hatchery who wittingly introduces several boys in a research with a sole agenda of tampering with the bright future of the boys in the name of tailor-made programs.

Huxley utilizes a lot of creativity in using this approach to reach young people, symbolized by ‘boys’ in the masterwork, aiming at voicing a word of caution to them especially when they adopt scientific methods of doing things. According to Huxley, tailor-made work programs and production systems as evidenced in the novel have led to the loss of direction of many young people and more so students.

The Theme of Tailor-made Programs

The author addresses the theme of tailor-made programs through various depictions of characters in the book. He uses changes in the environment to elaborate the effects of tailor-made programs. For instance, he uses changes in the world state society of the characters to illustrate how the changes influence their lives in a negative way. For instance, he uses a character such as Bernard to demonstrate the negative impact of a change in an environment or simply the impact of tailor-made programs on young people.

Bernard is against sexual and immoral behaviors that are evident in the world state society when he first encounters them. However, when he changes the environment by meeting new friends (a symbol of advanced technology), he changes his behaviors and begins to behave like the people in this world state by getting involved in promiscuous sexual relationships.

These programs affect most of the characters that are used in the program negatively. One example of the character is Bernard who, after being exposed to a different environment, behaves differently from the way he used to behave. Another character is John who takes his life away after his views on personal values and world-state society clash.

The clash leads to negative consequences that see his hanging after he is blindly influenced to change his once adorable behavior. In addition, the use of soma is very popular among the youths. The youths use this drug to attain happiness. They have failed to understand the negative impacts of the drug on their health. Therefore, the programs lead many youths to engage in deviant behaviors that the society does not uphold.

How the theme relates with the real life situation

The theme depicted in the book rhymes with the real life situation. Many youths are prone to the use of drugs upon their completion of school. They aspire to attain happiness. They do not want to face the truth. Furthermore, peer influence is one f the problems that the youth face. When they engage in a constructive or gainful employment, they proceed to seek happiness by getting involved in deviant behaviors such as promiscuous sex and drug use.

Conclusion

As Huxley has demonstrates, tailor-made programs can be of benefit to the society. However, they can as well lead to more problems and challenges to those at risk like the young people and students. Many young people who have the opportunity to engage in these programs do not utilize them well.

However, they use them to expose themselves to the dangers smoking, drug abuse, and irresponsible sexual behaviors. They seek happiness instead of the truth. In most cases, these uncouth behaviors have led to their death. Likewise, in the real world, the programs have the potential of transforming youths. Nevertheless, because they do not use them well, they are misled. They end up ruining their life in pursuit of happiness. Therefore, there is the need for young people to be cautious in everything they do.

Introduction

In Huxley’s Brave New World, the government embodies oppression. The antonym, ‘democracy’, is entirely absent. From decanting to death, the government controls every breath and thought without asking the consent of the governed. Further, every resident has become a tool of mind control – tattling, or shunning anyone deviating from expected behavior. There is no need for violence: as the Controller puts it,

“Government’s an affair of sitting, not hitting. You rule with the brains and the buttocks, never with the fists.”

In such an environment, one’s personal integrity (which appears here as a set of entirely personal standards for moral behavior) is nearly impossible to maintain. However, some individuals do attempt it, perhaps without understanding why. Bernard Marx, Helmholz Watson, John, and even Lenina, all struggle to stay true to an individual code of behavior, never mind the government’s position. Despite universal nutrition, health, and erotic outlets, they variously, and truly, suffer.

They suffer acutely from a sense of disconnectedness, exclusion, and revulsion (Bernard), from creative frustration (Helmholz), from horror, outrage, and loss (John), and even from a painful sense that monogamy would be preferable (Lenina). It is entirely fair to describe their mental suffering as unspeakable, if only because they literally lack the vocabulary to articulate their pain. (The State has long since obliterated all such words.)

Their divergence from government expectation is emotionally distressing, and leads them into behaviors which appear peculiar, but which allow them to be temporarily free of their subjugation. Bernard Marx’s strategies for dealing with the conflict between his own notions of sexual morality and dislike for soma are effective but not uniformly attractive.

He begins by despising and scorning the behavior around him, but then he chooses not to leave the cushioned A.F. world. When this stance places him at risk of exile, he demonstrates a cool resourcefulness in exploiting John to blackmail his boss. His efforts end by causing his exile anyway, but as Mond points out, he has a better chance to exercise personal integrity in Iceland than anywhere in the Brave New World.

He retains his own opinions in spite of the disapproval and isolation this causes

Bernard feels pain from his perceived inadequacy and isolation from others, burdened as well with acute awareness and insight. In the first portion of the book, he makes his stand for the principles which he holds dear by means of his private, internal scorn for his co-residents’ behavior and treatment of each other. He is deeply ambivalent about this, since he does desire human connection, but he retains his own opinion stubbornly.

Take the example of the conversation on the day following his evening with Lenina. On that ‘date’, he approached as close to revealing his inner turmoil as anyone ever does in the Brave New World (to Lenina’s total mystification and irritation). The next day, he says to her,

“I didn’t want it to end with our going to bed”.

This encapsulates his powerful personal desire to have a relationship for which there exists no model in his society. His behavior does not necessarily follow his principles (he did, after all, engage in the expected erotic activity with Lenina), but he wishes it could have. As always, Bernard’s actions reveal a mixed and flawed character.

He chooses to stay on, despite his clear disapproval of the society around him

Before his trip to the wilds, he becomes aware of the imminent threat of exile. He does not perceive the advantages of this outcome, not having the benefit of the Controller’s perspective, noted above. He neither grovels, at this point, nor offers to leave for Iceland, and freedom from constant government oppression, right away. Instead, we read that,

“Bernard left the room with a swagger, exulting, as he banged the door behind him, in the thought that he stood alone, embattled against the order of things; elated by the intoxicating consciousness of his individual significance and importance. Even the thought of persecution left him undismayed, was rather tonic than depressing.

He felt strong enough to meet and overcome affliction, strong enough to face even Iceland. In addition, this confidence was the greater for his not for a moment really believing that he would be called upon to face anything at all. People simply were not transferred for things like that. Iceland was just a threat. A most stimulating and life-giving threat. Walking along the corridor, he actually whistled.”

Bernard is strengthened, by the threat of exile, in his sense of the rightness of his views and preferences. He neither gives up nor runs away. Of course, as the quote above indicates, he also does not believe that he is truly at risk. As noted before, he is a mixture of aspirations and fallibility.

He takes advantage of a serendipitous opportunity to sabotage his oppressor

The risk of exile takes on a very concrete reality, once he is on his trip, but he only finds out because he has contacted his friend to turn off his apartment scent tap. Learning of his imminent dismissal from the only world he knows seems equivalent to the current humiliation of being broken up with on Facebook or by text message.

Bernard is, as always, not eager to give up his material, comforts, nor his principles! He plots his effective revenge against the petty oppression and intrusiveness of his boss with a masterful bit of extortion.

He shamelessly uses the hapless John and Linda to humiliate the Director. He thereby creates a space (temporarily) in which he can remain both a social critic, and nonetheless enjoy as much pleasant social contact as he can absorb. We see that,

“Success went fizzily to Bernard’s head, and in the process completely reconciled him (as any good intoxicant should do) to a world which, up till then, he had found very unsatisfactory. In so far as it recognized him as important, the order of things was good. But, reconciled by his success, he yet refused to forego the privilege of criticizing this order. For the act of criticizing heightened his sense of importance, made him feel larger.

Moreover, he did genuinely believe that there were things to criticize. (At the same time, he genuinely liked being a success and having all the girls he wanted.) Before those who now, for the sake of the Savage, paid their court to him, Bernard would parade a carping unorthodoxy. He was politely listened to.”

Bernard, by his creative exploitation of the Savage’s discomfort, also postpones the inevitable punishment for his own different and unwittingly disruptive behavior. However, he shows his underlying weakness once the axe falls and Mond pronounces his sentence of exile: Bernard has to be carried off and sedated to stop his sniveling. Helmholz, by contrast, is far more dignified in his response.

Conclusion

Bernard is never an entirely admirable character, from start to finish. He even contemplates running away and abandoning the Savage when John tries to toss out the soma, for example. However, he does indeed have a sense of integrity, which he sticks with almost all the way to the end (he shamefully offers to sacrifice his views in his groveling final speech to Mond).

He is clearly in distress, because of the oppressive societal insistence on sameness. Furthermore, given the wiping out of literature, he has only limited vocabulary to express his therefore unspeakable pain. He has a code of behavior to which he aspires, including a courtly attitude towards females.

To hold on to his integrity, he tries to avoid soma, fumblingly attempts to establish an outmoded and prohibited relationship with Lenina, and retains a critical view of the world around him. He stays on in his world, refusing the implicit opportunity to leave and emigrate to a place where the government has only minimal control (the Falklands, Iceland, Samoa).

When presented with the ingredients of a tidy blackmail, he grabs it and temporarily gets the best of everything: girls, adulation, the freedom to criticize, and his daily three squares. His ultimate fate may also be his greatest vindication and the validation of his cherishing of his personal integrity in the face of oppression and unspeakable pain. After all, as the Controller says,

“…he’s being sent to a place where he’ll meet the most interesting set of men and women to be found anywhere in the world. All the people who, for one reason or another, have got too self-consciously individual to fit into community-life. All the people who aren’t satisfied with orthodoxy, who’ve got independent ideas of their own. Every one, in a word, who’s any one.”

For a long time, various writers and philosophers have delved into the topic of studying society. In particular, most of them were concerned about his future and the direction in which it was developing. Therefore, such thoughts became the impetus for the formation of such genres as a dystopia. Within the framework of this literary approach, the authors attempt to point out social problems that can have serious negative consequences and lead to stratification and decay of people’s arrangements and lives. In addition, many philosophers created works that did not relate to fiction and presented a picture of the future awaiting individuals. Examples of these narratives are “Brave New World” by Aldous Huxley and “Amusing Ourselves to Death” by Neil Postman. Thus, this work will study the similarities between the visions of the authors of these literary works and their view of society.

First of all, before proceeding to the analysis of works, it is necessary to gain an understanding of what they represent. Henceforth, “Brave New World” by Aldous Huxley is a dystopia famous all over the world, which makes an attempt to imagine what can become of humanity under the influence of technological development. Thus, fiction presents to readers the World State, in which time is measured “after Ford,” that is after Henry Ford created his car Model T (Huxley 2). Society is deprived of any emotions and their manifestations since they are forbidden to express them from an early age. Moreover, people adhere to the motto “every one belongs to every one else” (Huxley 5). The main protagonist, who is often called Savage in the book, makes an attempt to change the new society, but his attempts are unsuccessful.

Particular importance in this work should be given to the social structure. Consequently, even before birth, all individuals are assigned a class, and “the embryos, which exist within tubes and incubators, are provided with differing amounts of chemicals and hormones in order to condition them into predetermined classes” (Lohnes para. 2). Children from early childhood are introduced to the concepts of love and erotic relationships between people and they take people on excursions to the dying to make people understand that death is a natural and unremarkable process. To suppress emotions and individuals in general, “somas” are used, which are narcotic substances (Huxley 5). With its help, the mind is clouded, which will allow the state to manipulate society.

The philosophical work “Amusing Ourselves to Death” by Neil Postman is largely considered prophetic for the modern world. This is due to the fact that the author focuses on the impact that television and other media sources of information have. Thus, in the work, the author “argues that most Americans look to television for public information and discussion, but television, by its nature, reduces discourse to entertainment” (Herzog p. 88). Research stated that “undermined our own political discourse with shallow, trivial, TV-centric entertainment, dulled and lulled to sleep by the consumption of endless imagery” (Cigelske 181). In other words, the author examined the question of what could happen if politics, journalism, education, and even religion become the subject of universal interest and entertainment.

Thus, this work becomes an addition to the ongoing controversies and a study in the sphere of what influence media sources can have on society. The value of Postman’s work also lies in the fact that he focuses on the two most famous dystopias of Aldous Huxley and George Orwell, providing a comparison of the visions of the future of humanity presented in them. Thus, the author determines that, at the moment, society is moving according to the scenario of the first writer.

Further, this work can proceed to consider how the ideas of the future Postman and Huxley intersected and had similar concepts. Thus, both authors emphasize that technological development will lead to negative consequences for people and deprive them of a full-fledged ability to think and make decisions. Television, in this context, is compared to a light drug created by Huxley’s government, which works as a tool for limiting citizens’ rights in exchange for entertainment. As a result, it gets ample opportunities to manage not only the flow of disseminated information, but also, by hiding behind the usual way of spending time, to influence the thoughts and feelings of individuals.

Moreover, the similarities in how the writers proposed the future of American society are manifested in the role played by mind-suppressing substances. Hence, “soma” in the Huxley world and television in modern society are both used not only by the state but also by people themselves. Therefore, they prefer various forms of entertainment and relaxation to escape from reality. In other words, they prefer to exist in an alternate reality that will allow them to avoid encountering the cruelty of the world and get rid of any unwanted thoughts.

Furthermore, on closer examination, there are clear parallels between the World State and the society Postman predicts. Thus, particular importance in these literary works is given to the impact of the state on the public at the expense of the information it consumes. The emphasis, in this case, is on the rapid dissemination of data. Thus, the higher the level of exposure of people to various information, the less they have the opportunity to comprehend it properly and analyze it correctly. Consequently, circumstances arise in which individuals become passive and accept what they are told as the truth. Postman points out that this is becoming a “figment of the technological imagination” (Postman 8). Therefore, the rulers “instead of coercive mechanisms of control such as military force, focus on the ‘disciplinary power’ which is based on surveillance, moving away from the absolute expenditure of power to that which entails minimum expenditure and maximum efficiency” (Hamamra 13). Thus, both authors point to the detrimental impact of innovations that are used by the elite to manipulate people.

In conclusion, this paper examined the similarities between the ideas of the future society, which were proposed by authors such as Aldous Huxley and Neil Postman. The need to analyze these literary works is that, in this way, people can gain awareness of how the technologization of society and exposure to media sources affect the construction of a passive and dependent society. “Brave New World” and “Amusing Ourselves to Death” become unique sources of transmission of a possible picture of the future and have many parallels in the narratives. Therefore, both works focus on how the state can influence the initiative and activity of individuals using tools to suppress their consciousness. Thus, the constant presence of technologies and media sources in the life of society has serious negative consequences, and the authors emphasize the need for people to realize the growing problem.

Works Cited

Cigelske, Tim. “Politics and Culture: Are We Amusing Ourselves to Death?.” Journal of Media Ethics, vol. 32, no. 3, 2017, pp. 181-183.

Hamamra, Bilal Tawfiq. “A Foucauldian reading of Huxley’s Brave New World.” Theory and Practice in Language Studies, vol. 7, no. 1, 2017, pp. 12-17.

Herzog Jr, William A. “Amusing Ourselves to Death.” Christian Scholar’s Review, vol. 51, no. 1, 2021, pp. 88-90.

Huxley, Aldous. Brave New World. Good Press, 2021.

Lohnes, Kate. “Brave New World.” Britannica, Web.

Postman, Neil. Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business. Penguin Books, 2005.

Brave New World is a book that Aldous Huxley wrote in 1931 and it has very imaginatively portrayed the London of 2540 AD. The novel has very elaborately come out with the concepts of sleep-learning and reproductive technology that collectively contribute in changing the society. In this regard Huxley has reassessed the book in an essay he wrote in 1958 and titled as ‘Brave New World Revisited’ as also in his book titled ‘Island’ that was written in 1962. Huxley wrote the original book when he was residing in England and France before he shifted to California in 1937. The author was a known writer in satire and had been contributing regularly to magazines such as Vogue and Vanity Fair. He also wrote a few successful books on satire such as ‘Crome Yellow’, ‘Antic Hay’and ‘Those Barrren Leaves’ in 1921, 1923 and 1925 respectively and had established his identity as a writer of excellent repute. Notably, Huxley got the inspiration from the book ‘Men Like Gods’ which is a utopian novel by H G Wells. Brave New World is in fact a parody of this book by Huxley, whereby he aimed at portraying a rather frightening picture of the coming future in referring to the so called brave new world as ‘negative utopia’. Huxley has written in the introduction of his recent print of the book that much of the inspiration for the book was a result of his visit to the high technology Brunner and Mond plant of the Imperial Chemical Industries in Billingham, which impressed him a great deal by way of the processes used in the plant. The book is set in the future and portrays some contemporary issues pertaining to the earlier 20^th century such as the effects of the Industrial revolution in bringing far reaching changes in the world of production techniques of several technologically advanced products. He also talks about the World War I and the Russian Revolution of 1917 as also uses the names of some contemporary leaders such as Bernard Marx and Benito Hoover in formulating his strategy in the book.

Huxley has very elegantly used the settings and characters in his futuristic fantasies in expressing popular opinions such as the fear one has in losing personal identities in the fast pace world in the futuristic environment. It is evident from the book that Huxley was much agitated by the youth culture, sexual promiscuity and commercial tendencies as also the self-centered attitude of the Americans. There is strong evidence to indicate that Huxley wrote “Brave New World’ due to his inherent fear that Europe would get Americanized, and it was America in his mind that was the biggest inspiration. The ‘feelies’ referred to in his book are in fact his way of expressing his opinion about the motion pictures of the time in America and the sex hormone chewing gum is a reference to the chewing gum in this regard which had become a symbol of America at that time. Huxley’s ideas of the book were very specificly a result in indication of his opinion about the ideas expressed by writers such as George Bernard Shaw and H G Wells who had during the time written about the world state and socialism. Huxley was criticized by critics of that time for his opinions as narrated in ‘Brave New World’ in being too far-fetched and extra imaginative without much relevance to reality.

Huxley has also been criticized for making people to interpret that the ‘brave new world’ would be highly unrealistic in creating a false utopia that promised happiness of a superficial nature, that too would be short lived. People were asking questions if the world portrayed by Huxley was indeed our post modern world because high levels of consumerism is driving people to eat in more unhealthy styles as also to spend more on this pattern despite the ill effects of the same. It is ironic that ideas such as that of people going to cinemas merely for getting distracted than for experiential entertainment and that the suburbs of cities are promoted as a compromise formula in lieu of country and city life, are indeed atrocious in the eyes of several people of literary achievements. The central question of ethical discipline raised in the book is about how a man should live his life; whether to experience the ups and downs that life offers or live a safe and secure life by compromising on the options. The civilized people in the book are portrayed as being happy in getting all that they wish to have and that the savages have a great time in life with the suffering and pain that goes with such people. It is observed that interestingly the book has raised more questions in regard to such problems than in solving them.

All in all, the ‘Brave New World’ has in recent times come to enjoy immense acceptability amongst several sections of the literary world in finding its contents to be very much relevant in regard to contemporary matters and issues which have been plaguing the capitalist structure of several countries. The book virtually instructs us to go back to the cultural assumptions of the past in deciding what is logical and reasonable to pursue for civilization in surging ahead towards the desired goals

Brave New World, by Aldous Huxley

“It was a masterly piece of work. But once you began admitting explanations in terms of purpose–well, you didn’t know what the result might be. It was the sort of idea that might easily decondition the more unsettled minds among the higher castes–make them lose their faith in happiness as the Sovereign Good and take to believing, instead, that the goal was somewhere beyond, somewhere outside the present human sphere, that the purpose of life was not the maintenance of well-being, but some intensification and refining of consciousness, some enlargement of knowledge. Which was, the Controller reflected, quite possibly true? But not, in the present circumstance, admissible. He picked up his pen again, and under the words, “Not to be published” drew a second line, thicker and blacker than the first; then sighed, “What fun it would be,” he thought, “if one didn’t have to think about happiness!” (Huxley, 1965, p. 136).

This quotation is Mustapha Mond’s response to a manuscript on the “mathematical treatment of the conception of purpose” (Huxley, 1965, p. 135). His musings express Huxley’s skepticism of the effectiveness of global management. Elsewhere, Huxley communicates both his distaste for his contemporary world and the dangers of trying to improve it, in subtle, often humorous jibes. His vision of the future is of a fragile fabric of control holding down a world that has sacrificed a great deal but resists mightily.

Human attempts to re-make the world are, in Huxley’s view, a risky business. No matter how completely the government seeks to manage the population, the citizens are still human.

Nature pushes back

The residents in A.F. 632 are still a part of nature, with all of nature’s contradiction, capacity for rebirth, and vulnerability. Despite the New World government’s determination to direct everything, including via “the Weather Department’s captive balloon” shining “rosily in the sunshine” (Huxley, 1965, p. 120), natural forces still exert their influence.

For example, the urge to procreate remains. Despite unlimited pregnancy-free sex, women feel better after a “pregnancy substitute” (Huxley, 1965, p. 27).

As another example, the government beautifies the “Park Lane Hospital for the Dying”, offers painkillers, and performs “wholesome death conditioning” on children (Huxley, 1965, pp. 143-159, passim). Death, a force of nature, remains inescapable.

Aging, another natural process, still occurs, as senility, despite advanced interventions. These are described as follows: “We preserve them from diseases.” The government keeps “their internal secretions… balanced.” They control “their magnesium-calcium ratio.” They transfuse “young blood.” The result: “Youth almost unimpaired till sixty, and then, crack! The end.” (Huxley, 1965, p. 84)

Disease, another natural process, stalks any un-inoculated individual. Lenina overlooks a trypanosomiasis treatment, and the resulting sleeping sickness death is the “first in half a century” (Huxley, 1965, p. 143).

Human beings are still human

Human nature persists, despite efforts to control it. Our tendency to fight, and do dumb things, resists the government’s plans. An example is a disastrous experiment with an all-Alpha settlement. This ended after a mere six years in “a first-class civil war” (Huxley, 1965, p. 172).

Prejudice against the ‘other’, by whatever name, remains. It is encouraged, as caste consciousness, by sleep teaching. However, it appears in ways not perhaps foreseen by the Controllers.

For example, early conditioning against dirt and illness eliminates sympathy, by the majority of New Worlders, for anyone’s suffering. Linda has no feeling for her weeping son. She says, “If it hadn’t been for you…I might have gotten away.” (Huxley, 1965, p. 97) As another example, Bernard is “profoundly squeamish” at John’s distress (Huxley, 1965, p. 206).

Everyone throughout society also expresses, unquestioningly, the scientific racism that values people according to external physical characteristics. For example “eighty-three almost noseless black brachycephalic Deltas were cold-pressing” (Huxley, 1965, p. 122). This occurs despite repeated messages that “All men are physicochemically equal” (Huxley, 1965, p. 57).

The New World conditioning does not guarantee happiness for all

Despite the early conditioning to poison, stimulate, or sleep-teach “moral education”, fitting each ‘type’ of embryo/child for its eventual job and lifestyle, human individuality persists (Huxley, 1965, p. 18). The major characters of the New World are all, in some way, unique. All, sadly, end up unhappy.

For example, Helmholtz regrets the poetry he may not and cannot write because he is writing “about nothing” (Huxley, 1965, p. 54). Lenina falls prey to a “V.P.”, or a violent passion, a confusing, overwhelming, and prohibited attachment for John the Savage (Huxley, 1965, p. 143). She is so torn by her conditioning that she cannot even appreciate John’s lovely compliment to her when he says he wants to outlive “beauty’s outward with a mind That doth renew swifter than blood decays “ (Huxley, 1965, p. 147).

. Bernard feels left out, alienated, delighted when he is popular, and devastated when he is exiled from the world he insults. He ends up groveling before the Controller, yelling, “Send me to an island?” (Huxley, 1965, p. 173).

The Controller himself is conflicted. He gave up his beloved science to avoid being exile (Huxley, 1965, p. ibid). Fortunately, for him and the “fairly high price” he paid, the Controller has power. He can read ancient books and send other non-conformists away to distant islands with more sheep than people (Huxley, 1965, p. 177).

Did Huxley regret that he could not eliminate discontent without total control?

Based purely on the evidence of the text, Huxley seems to have feared the future he evoked. At the same time, however, he does not seem to have felt that real life, as he knew it, led inevitably to fulfillment, and the best and highest use of human talents. His portrayal of contemporary family life, especially among the less privileged, is particularly vicious. His description of mother love as “dangerous, insane, [and] obscene”, specifically, is downright disturbing (Huxley, 1965, p. 27). He understood how early negative experiences and deprivation could warp people. “No wonder those pre-moderns were mad and wicked and miserable”, says the Controller (Huxley, 1965, p. 30). This statement demonstrates deep compassion.

Given that he expressed distaste for the world around him, how should we interpret his detailed descriptions of ways that people could be made contented, if not happy? Was he revealing a bit of bitterness? Was he wistful about the possibility of solving humanity’s problems? Is it possible that he wished he could predestine contentment?

Conclusion

“Happiness”, in the quotation of Mustapha Mond cited above, stands in for all the attributes of human life that the A.F. world sacrifices for stability. Huxley was prophetic about so many elements of his world (consider his description of the ‘feelies’!). This precision suggests that he believed many of the inventions and events he ⁱpredicted would come to pass soon. He must have been saddened that the elimination of human discontent seemed to require crushing the human spirit. The un-crushable vitality of humanity nevertheless seems to struggle against all these efforts throughout the book.

Work Cited

Huxley, A. (1965). Brave New World (Harper Colophon ed.). New York, NY, USA: Harper and Row, Publishers.

A possible oversight

One area where Huxley may not have foreseen, fully, the danger in trying to control everything, especially according to Ford, is in resource use. There is no mention of recycling, but rather “the conscription of consumption” for the greater good and the maintenance of stability (Huxley, 1965, p. 37). The result is what seems to modern eyes massive, deliberate, and enforced waste of resources:

• Any new game “requires at least as much apparatus as the most complicated of existing games” (Huxley, 1965, p. 21).
• Everyone is conditioned, “So that they consume manufactured articles as well as transport.” (Huxley, 1965, p. 26),
• Everyone is conditioned to repeat, “Ending is better than mending” (Huxley, 1965, p. 37)
• Round-the-clock energy use abounds. For example, “Flood-lighted, its three hundred and twenty meters of white Carrara-surrogate gleamed with snowy incandescence “(Huxley, 1965, p. 61).

On the other hand, the population figure of two thousand million he mentions is less than a third of today’s actual estimate (Huxley, 1965, p. 26). Could he have imagined such a huge population as our planet carries today? Alternatively, did he indeed imagine it, and deliberately set a conservative limit on the crowding in his envisioned future? Societal stability is easier when everyone’s basic needs are met. Limited population growth would help make that possible.

This is especially true since scientific advances are suppressed in the New World. For a modern reader, the absence of any obvious mention of recycling (except for the phosphorous reclaimed from human corpses) stands out like a sore thumb. It is such a rare exception to the completeness and believability of Huxley’s New World.

Huxley has, in most other aspects, carefully thought out the design of the society that emerges post-Nine Years’ War, literally, from cradle to grave, and in all sectors of the globe. His foresight is uncanny: consider the television-like appliance that entertains a dying Linda, posited years before the widespread availability of television (Huxley, 1965, p. 153). Consider the anthrax bombs (remember 2001?) which he predicts would wipe out human resistance to massive, unprecedented control – how spookily prophetic he was! (Huxley, 1965, p. 175) Consider in-vitro fertilization, routine use of scent for mood control, synthetic music, and so many other examples of Huxley’s accurate prediction!

However, the development of petroleum-based synthetics in manufacturing had just recently begun in 1932, when the book first appeared. He seems to have been aware of cellulose acetate, a plant-based plastic invented in 1927 since this material appears prominently in Lenina’s wardrobe. He does not seem aware of the later, more petroleum-dependent plastic materials, which so revolutionized clothing, toys, and our whole way of living from the Second World War onwards (consider the role of nylon stockings!).

Perhaps he could not visualize the increasing pressure on petroleum used not only as fuel for transport, heating, and lighting but also for thousands of our daily objects. He has a small blind spot for this problem, it seems.

(It also may be that his imagined factory-style food production system is somewhat in conflict with what we now know about sustainable agriculture, but there is not enough detail to be sure. Interestingly, Mustapha Mond does not seem to be thinking of ecology when he says, “We could synthesize every morsel of food if we wanted to. But we don’t. We prefer to keep a third of the population on the land. For their sakes–because it takes longer to get food out of the land than out of a factory. Besides, we have the stability to think of.” (Huxley, 1965, p. 172))

However if the population is compelled to consume, what does this mean in light of the limitations on natural resources which we are so aware of today? If this is a blind spot for Huxley, it is a dangerous one. We use petroleum for fuel and as a substrate for manufacturing. We face, right now, major challenges in finding alternatives. It is difficult to imagine that a society so pushed to consume, as is the New World, would survive for long without some organized re-use of materials. This draws attention to a very small oversight in the lovingly (if terrifyingly) detailed world he outlined.

Introduction

Life experiences acted as one of the major inspirations to ancient writers. Many writers came up with different writings to express their experiences and visions. The writers came up with books and articles that tried to warn the society about the effects of their actions, while others tried to educate the society on what it needed to do to better its future.

One of the writers who came up with a novel based on their experiences was Aldous Huxley. Aldous wrote the book Brave New World, which reflects an astounding outlook of the future that on the surface seems more or less humorous (Trimble 21). Nevertheless, Huxley did not intend to portray humor in his book. Actually, it is hard to decipher the message put forward in the book.

He predicted that there would emerge a regime that would strip people of their freedom. Aldous book is fascinating for he paints a picture of a society attached to a pathetic regime, which is of no use to the common person. As aforementioned, Aldous life experiences contributed largely to this writing. This paper discusses how Aldous life experience influenced the content and style the Brave New World book.

Aldous background

Aldous Huxley was born in1894 to a famous family that was strongly engrossed to England’s scientific and literary customs. His father was the son of Thomas Henry Huxley, a renowned biologist. On the other hand, her mother shared background with Matthew Arnold, a renowned littérateur. Given that he was brought up in a background comprising teachers, writers, and scientists, Aldous got quality education, which allowed him to amass a lot of knowledge.

Huxley was a keen learner and during his stint, he was prominent for his intellect and mastery of English (Trimble 28). Moreover, he was versed with inventions in the scientific field. In spite of his scientific knowledge being shallow, he was always determined to achieve all that bordered conventional science. His education bordered both science and literature, thus leaving him at a better position to incorporate the contemporary scientific discoveries in his literary works.

Influence from life experience

Huxley posits, “Human beings are given free will in order to choose between insanity on the one hand and lunacy on the other hand” (vii). Most of his opinions in the book reflect his views on the effects of scientific and technological advancement on the future society. After monitoring the society for a long time, Aldous learnt that people derived their happiness from things that were not worth being valued. For instance, people were happy to engage in promiscuity, sports, and utilizing mass-produced products.

Lenina claims, “How I loathe intravenals, don’t you” (Huxley 29), which signifies the level of promiscuity in the society. In pursuit for happiness, the society ended up sacrificing the most crucial fabrics that united it like family, culture, love, and freedom. With an idea of what scientific and technological advancements were, capable of, Aldous came up with the Brave New World as a way of sending a warning to a society that strongly embraced new changes without thinking about the possible repercussions.

Aldous introduces a pleasure-drug, soma. The drug is not actually a utopian wonder drug. Instead, it helps in eliminating hangovers rather than transforming one’s life.

After using the drug, Bernard posits, “It’ll be a failure again” (Huxley 61). This signifies that the drug did not transform him into learning professional. Desire by the society to look for shortcuts in everything it does compelled Aldous to bring up the idea of pleasure-drug in his book. Bernard Marx took the drug hoping that it would help him become a sleep-learning professional.

Nevertheless, it does not. He posits, “I know it will be a failure again” (Huxley 62) to show that the drug does not meet the intended purpose. Unlike in the past where people engaged in promiscuity, Huxley brings out a new form of promiscuity brought about by scientific and technological advancement. Taking pleasure-drug does not add value to human life in any way. Instead, it triggers an inauthentic and mindless “moron happiness.”

Bernard laments, “No, the real problem is: How is it …if I were free-not enslaved by my conditioning” (Huxley 61). He intended to bring out the negative effects technological and scientific utopia that people were embracing blindly. If Aldous intended to tease instead of fending off emotional primeval with the biological illusion, then he could have visualized perfect wonder drugs that enhanced or underpinned our most treasured standards (Postman 45-52).

In people’s imaginations, probably they might have been allowed to (through scientific advancements) embrace novel wonders to transform themselves into the romanticized editions of the kind of people would desire to be. In this case, the utopians could have exploited behavioral conditioning to protract, rather than destabilize, a more compassionate culture of elegant humanity and a life well lived.

Nevertheless, Aldous had a different idea when writing his book. His wide knowledge in science gave him an insight on the possible effects of future scientific discoveries. He presents Henry claiming, “Some men are almost rhinoceroses; they don’t respond properly to conditioning” (Huxley 59). This assertion shows that the conditioning may at times be detrimental. Hence, he wrote the book with an aim of warning the society against embracing all manners of scientific utopianism.

Huxley predicted that a time would come when the various castes would resist taking soma. John wonders “…aren’t you shortening her life by giving her so much?” (Huxley 104). Huxley showed that people like John had started doubting the benefits of the drug. Besides, his fear is confirmed by Dr. Shaw who answers, “In one sense, yes” (Huxley 104).

Today, Huxley’s predictions are prevalent. Currently, countries have come up with sanctions against numerous mood drugs (Postman 58). Besides, people fear to use even the approved drugs. Many people suffer from mental challenges that can be resolved using clinically approved anti-anxiety and mood-booster drugs. Nevertheless, many fear using these drugs and believe that the drugs might transform them into zombies.

This aspect signifies the level of pessimism, which the contemporary society has towards scientific development. The pessimism emerged after the society learnt that scientists had been taking them for a ride by developing drugs that did not meet their prospects.

Apart from education, another main factor that played a significant role in writing the Brave New World book was the illness that befell Huxley during his tender age. While still a teenager, Aldous suffered from eye problem that impaired his sight. Huxley had a dream of becoming a doctor. Nevertheless, as his sight continued deteriorating, it became hard for him to pursue his dream. Imaginativeness and sightlessness form part of the themes that defined his writings.

In writing the Brave New World, Huxley intended to bring out the level of blindness that was dominant in the society. Lenina asserts, “Of course they don’t. How can they? They don’t know what it’s like being anything else” (Huxley 50). Lenina signifies the level of complacency within society. His inclusion of pleasure drugs and promiscuity that cloud the society intended to portray the magnitude of blindness that infested the society.

People were blindly embracing all sorts of scientific and technological utopians without considering their effects. They believed it would help in eliminating their problems. Lenina asks Bernard “Why do you not take soma when you have these dreadful ideas. You would forget all about them” (Huxley 62). The society was unaware of the future effects of this utopia and Huxley believed that he had the duty to help it understand the repercussions of its actions.

Aldous Huxley was brought up in a background where love and culture were the social fabrics uniting the society (Smith 12). Families were united and the parents encouraged their children to study and practice all that was right. Mustapha Mond mutters, “Try to realize what it was like to have a viviparous mother” (Huxley 26), which underscores the value a family had in the past.

As the society continued to advance both scientifically and technologically, Huxley learnt that people were gradually doing away with the critical social fabrics that united society. Love and culture was gradually transforming into immorality and individualism. Huxley wrote the book to send a message that the continued technological and scientific advancements would rob the society of one of the most coveted thing, viz. love.

He writes, “Try to imagine what living with one’s family’ meant” (Huxley 27). He used satire to bring out the negative effects of civilization in a way that his readers would understand. The utopian happiness brought by scientific and technological advancement hinged on sacrifice, and to realize it, the society had to part with religion, art, and love. After enjoying parental love during his early age as well as the love of her wife in his later age, Huxley believed that love was the most critical aspect that kept the society together.

However, he felt that the demands presented by civilization were likely to tear apart love in society. He sought to sustain love within the society by showing how sexual promiscuity (brought about by civilization) demeaned love. Prior to the onset of civilization, both men and women fancied each other. Besides, they preserved sex since they believed that misusing it would mean dishonoring one another. Nevertheless, civilization allowed people to misuse sex thus treating women like prostitutes.

In his book, Huxley introduced the idea of the caste system to signify the division that was likely to emerge due to scientific and technological advancement. Mr. Foster asserts, “We also predestine and condition. We decant our babies as socialized human beings, as Alphas, or Epsilons, as future sewage workers or future directors of Hatcheries” (Huxley 11).

The affluent people in the society would require the poor to work in their industries, farms, and homes. Hence, they would use all means to ensure that other people did not acquire education, which could liberate them from poverty. Mr. Foster confesses, “But in Epsilons we don’t need human intelligence” (Huxley 47), which proves that the affluent can ensure that the poor do not get education so that they remain their slaves.

According to Huxley, other castes developed the attitude of respecting Alphas who “work much harder than we do, because they’re so frightfully clever” (21). In this context, Alphas was the caste in the upper echelon, which symbolized the rich and educated. Aldous came from an educated background.

Hence, he had an idea of how the educated had the power to influence the uneducated. At some point, Mr. Foster claims, “Our colleagues upstairs will teach them to love it” (Huxley 13), which proves that the rich have the capacity to make the poor submit to all their demands. His physical blindness compelled him to expose the level of blindness towards science and technology that existed in the society.

People believed that technological advancement would have positive effects on their lives. However, according to Brave New World, scientific and technological advancements were meant to benefit the affluent at the expense of the poor. Huxley felt obliged to enlighten the society on this issue since he had the knowledge.

Conclusion

Writers rely heavily on their life experience when coming up with literary works. While some writers use their experience to enlighten or warn the society, others use it to castigate certain values brought about by civilization. One of the factors that influenced Huxley’s writing was his educational background and knowledge in science.

He used this experience to enlighten people on the dangers of embracing a utopian society. Another factor that influenced his writing was the blindness that affected him at a tender age. He felt that the society was blind about the dangers of civilization and he had the duty to open their eyes. His book aimed at helping the society to understand the dangers associated with civilization.

Works Cited

Huxley, Aldous. Brave New World, New York: Buccaneer Books, Inc., 1946. Print.

Postman, Neil. Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business, New York: Penguin, 1998. Print.

Smith, Grover. Letters of Aldous Huxley, New York: Harper & Row, 1969. Print.

Trimble, John. Writing with Style: Conversation on the Art of Writing, New York: Prentice Hall, 2000. Print.

Affect of Circumstance on an Individual: Huxley’s Brave New World

John, in Brave New World, tries to hold fast to the values that he has developed by himself in the Reservation. These values were formed out of the mix of Christianity and indigenous, quasi-animist spiritual practices of the Native Americans prevalent on the Reservation, the influence of reading the Bible, and the inspiration of reading Shakespeare. He is not allowed to participate fully in the rites and ceremonies of the Reservation, so he fashions his system of thought out of the scripture and the dramas he reads.

His values are not only out of touch with the Brave New World, but would be profoundly out of touch with our society today, and, for that matter, the values of Huxley’s England or America in 1932.

Does he cling to his values or abandon them? He clings to his values while reaching out for what he finds appealing or interesting in the unfamiliar world outside the Reservation. He falls instantly into infatuation with Lenina. He is intrigued by the notion of a world wider than what he knows. He takes the opportunity, without question or hesitation, to explore the universe beyond his childhood limits.

It must have become apparent to him soon after John arrived in the civilized world, that Bernard had brought him back to shame and discredit his superior. Tomakin, after all, had acted selfishly even by the standards of his society in leaving behind his companion without making a serious attempt to locate her or check back to inquire whether she or her body had turned up. John becomes keenly aware of his status as a tourist attraction and political football, as evidenced by his refusal to attend Bernard’s party.

If he had gone with the flow, succumbed to the unsubtle bribery of being taken everywhere and being shown everything, and had become one with the society around him, it would have been a coup for the Director, but John remains his own man for the most part, throughout. He retains his values and his identity despite great distractions and temptations.

Once arrived in the World Estate, he follows his star from first to last with very little deviation. He embraces his father with respect upon meeting him, as would any well-brought-up offspring in his world. He treats women like Lenina with courtliness and individual attention, rather than casually and indiscriminately using them sexually, He tries to care for and cherish his mother, Linda, even when she is far gone in a drugged stupor. He avoids soma, he prizes solitude, and he eschews and forswears all the amusements of the world, among other choices.

Although he has no obvious ambitions in the World Estate, the death of his mother inspires him to take some action. As Huxley puts it, “It was as though a shutter had been opened.” He sees an opportunity to try to make a difference, and he seizes it. He tries to encourage the hospital workers to avoid soma, at risk to his safety and liberty. The results are entirely negative, and he has not the slightest impact on the workers’ behavior. The incident brings him unwelcome official attention and contributes to the exiling of Bernard and Helmholtz. However, it is entirely consistent with his values and one of the only open, un-self-interested protests against the system that is voiced in the whole book.

This all has far-reaching implications for him, indeed. He eventually sees that he cannot manage to live in this world without violating everything he holds to be important. His vision of beauty, voiced by Shakespeare’s Miranda, is revealed to be crass and shallow and corrupt in its reality. His dream for finding inclusion with those of his mother’s kind is a nightmare instead. He will be included in the Brave New World, but he will no longer be himself.

John finally withdraws to a sort of hermitage to avoid conflicting with the abhorrent values he sees around him. He chooses this style of life despite the barely livable conditions there. Even at this stage of his war against the Brave New World, however, he is still enchanted by the new and innovative and succumbs to the lure of convenience foods in packing for his move. However, he forswears the nutritious convenience foods for the more difficult fare. He pursues independence and self-sufficiency by gardening for himself.

He tries to purge his mind of desires and images he finds incompatible with his values by whipping himself, a technique long used by religious purists. However, even here in attempted isolation, he is pursued by the behaviors he fears and detests. His ladylove, Lenina, follows him and attempts in all innocence to engage him sexually.

The crowd, drawn to his hiding spot, and intrigued by the drama and novelty of his flagellation, work him and themselves into a frenzy of mimicry and excitement, entirely at cross-purposes. Eventually, he awakes to a memory of being led, without conscious volition, into a massive breach of his values in a soma-fueled orgy-porgy. This horrible betrayal of all that he esteems in himself leads him to take his own life.

What is Huxley trying to say in showing us this unfortunate young man struggling to live according to his ideals while in a violently alien environment of opposed values? John seizes control one last time in taking his own life – that is not a cheerful message, but a clear one. Huxley seems to be telling his readers that the kind of moral swamp that the world is headed towards is so bad that death represents a more honorable fate.

The whole book is a warning to all of us to examine closely what our governments and institutions do while we are not paying attention. During the wars and plagues, Huxley points out through the Director; people stopped monitoring the government and allowed the ruling entities to assume the role of moral arbiter. By showing John’s brave, if wrong-headed attempts to stick with what he thought was right and beautiful and good, Huxley points up the hideousness and shallowness that we risk when governments operate unchecked, unwatched, and without principled participation by all.

Technology In The Service Of Governmental Control In Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World

After Ford, in Huxley’s envisioned society, the government takes entire charge of life in exchange for safety and security. The tools the government uses include soma, sex, cloning, conditioning, reinforcement, monitoring, and exile of non-conformists. Although there is much interest in many of these methods in our real world today, we are not there quite yet. The main reason may be, rather frighteningly, that we have not yet perfected these technologies yet.

A government-sponsored “holiday from reality”: Soma

The Brave New World runs on soma. This sounds like a current advertising message about Dunkin Donuts, but it is certainly true of the imagined world of Aldous Huxley. Many people today go their whole lives without using caffeine, but in the A.F. world, everyone uses soma with government encouragement and enforcement. I

In our real world, many, if not most people do, eventually, have some experience with a mind-altering substancedrug during their lifetime, if only at weddings or holiday celebrations. All these items, from wine to LSD to ecstasy, our era’s mood alterers, have horrible side effects. For most people, therefore, they are self-limiting.

Current psychoactive substances have too many negative effects to be universally used

Too much beer makes you fall asleep. Too many uppers make you crash from exhaustion. Anything that affects the brain also makes you feel uncomfortable afterwards. They leave you with a , but there is a self-limiting effect of all of our contemporary psychotropics and mood-alterers. They give horrible hangovers, or the munchies, or they lead to disgusting, dangerous or self-destructivemaladaptive behavior, like weaving all over the road, or vomiting, or falling down, or saying really stupid things.

Those effects make regular misuse unpleasantcomfortable unless you the individual becomes emotionally or chemically dependent on a various mind-altering substances. Of course, many people do, unfortunately, indeed become dependent, because most of the mind-altering agents we have today are also chemically addictive. Even more dangerously, they can allow you to avoid facing and solving problems, like loneliness, or disappointment, or anger. They act as a crutch, a crutch that can rapidly become. indispensable.

Dependency on a mind alteringmind-altering substance, even a legal one, can lead to particularly horrible results. All of us know of a young adult who has lost interest in school or friends, or anything or anybody, unless they can help obtain the next ‘high’. All of us have heard about families where a parent is not present because they are always at a bar, or passed out unconscious, or transformed changed into a monster when under the influence.

Unfortunately, most of us have heard of a young person involved in a car accident because of driving while intoxicated. The tabloid news is full of people who have become addicted to prescription drugs, or find themselves bouncing in and out of methadone programs. We know that many date rapes and unwanted pregnancies result from misuse of all sorts of drugs and alcohol. Much of the crime that makes our cities dangerous can be traced to drug users and dealers.

THowever, these unpleasant results side effects make it unlikely that even legalization will result in universal usage of marijuana, cocaine, peyote, mescal, heroin, and synthesized drugs, no matter the pressure from government or suppliers. Not until and unless we have a drug as free of side effects and negative behavioral results as soma promises, are we likely to be at risk of becoming a nation of drug-heads.

Soma: government stability is assured

Huxley is clear on the point that such a fabulously convenient substance did not just materialize.. He says that it took years of subsidized research to discover it.”Two thousand pharmacologists and bio-chemists were subsidized in A.P. 178…Six years later it was being produced commercially.” (Huxley, Brave New World, 1965, p. 41)

The attraction of soma is that it is so free of downside effects. It relieves stress, and worries, and gives energy and enthusiasm for work (for the government of course). It peps you up for recreation, and dulls discomfort. It gives pleasant visions, even a taste of eternity. In really large doses, it is a perfect sleeping pill., “The perfect drug…Euphoric, narcotic, pleasantly hallucinant.” (Huxley, Brave New World, 1965, p. ibid) It has no apparent side effects unless over-used to a point where even an A.F. physician objects. I, such as in Linda’s case, when she demands it in constantly increasing ridiculous doses.

Then it kills.. Soma takes the place of all the alcohol, tobacco, and prescription drugs of the earlier age It replaces all the alcohol, tobacco, and Valiums of the earlier age. A citizen can, “Take a holiday from reality whenever you like, and come back without so much as a headache or a mythology.” (Huxley, Brave New World, 1965, p. 42)It even helps to replace religion. In a cynical dismissal of both religion and opiates, the Controller describes the soma-induced high as having, “All the advantages of Christianity and alcohol; none of their defects.” (Huxley, Brave New World, 1965, p. ibid)

To ensure its use for the purposes of control,hen, the government makes sure that everyone uses it by means of constant reinforcing messages. Soma is a part of everyone’s pay package, so it is integrated into daily life, whether at work, in recreation, or in the religion substitute of the Community Sing.

such as, “What you need is a gramme of soma…One cubic centimetre cures ten gloomy sentiments…And do remember that a gramme is better than a damn.” (Huxley, Brave New World, 1965, pp. 42-43)

The result of all this is long-term stability, and ease of governingthat, “Stability was practically assured.” (Huxley, Brave New World, 1965, p. 42)

Soma, therefore, relieves stress and worries and gives energy and enthusiasm for work (for the government of course). In small doses, it elevates mood, in larger doses, it gives pleasant visions, and in still larger doses, it offers sleep. It has no apparent side effects unless over-used to a point where even an A.F. physician objects, such as in Linda’s case when she demands it. Then it kills.

In spite of its advantages, soma is nonetheless a deadener. It hides the true nature reality of the world from its users. Sometimes, this seems to help: Lenina manages to listen to a boring discussion with an attentive expression on her face because she is high as a kite!

However, Huxley warns us that, describes how, for Lenina and her partner Henry, soma can shut out the reality of the world.“soma had raised a quite impenetrable wall between the actual universe and their minds” (Huxley, Brave New World, 1965, p. 60).

For example, while under the influence of soma, Lenina and Henry do not notice that the sky is blotted out by huge electric message signs. They don’t notice that the dance hall (the government) is ordering them to leave with both musical and verbal commands.In a soma-induced haze, such details as the blotting out of the stars by electric message signs, and the ever-present commands of the government, are simply invisible. With everyone walking around in a contented daze, Tthe government can rob the populace of independenceautonomy as easilysurely as one can pick the pocket of a drunk passed out in the gutterblissed out dope head.

The soma does makes them happy, after a fashion. It also makes them dangerously unobservant of what is going on, or at least, it makes it difficult to maintain a sense of outrage about the government’s choices and actions. An awareness of what might be wrong and the energy to object are both necessary for a population to create change.

This ‘perfect drug’drug’, which shuts down the sense of outrage,, along with totalunfettered access to sex, keeps the citizens cooperativedocile and unlikely to revolt. In combination with the predictability offered by the cloning process and other techniques, the government makes its own job much simplereasier.

Prohibition is no bargain, either!

Should we be looking enviously at this imagined state of affairs where a powerful substance is freely available? It is certainly true that the current systems we have in place to deal with mind-altering drugs have been notably unsuccessful. The people who seem to benefit in an obvious way are dealers, folks who manage prisons, rehab/detoxification programs, halfway houses, and all the other institutions that pick up the pieces of shattered lives, and of course, lawyers. All these people They all have an enormous, self-interested motivation to maintain the system as it is now.

Users certainly do not benefit! Users are at risk at every point in the current consumption process. When users buy illegal substances on the street tThey receive products of uncertain quality. These can, which can literally kill them. Their transactions to purchase substances often take place at high risk to their physical safety. Dealers kill each other, and customers who don’t pay or somehow offend the dealer. Finally, if a user is they are detected by law enforcement, there goes their chance to finish school or college, have a career, or succeed in life. There are vast numbers of people behind bars because of possession of an illegal substancethey risk their current liberty and their future success due to a criminal record.

In the case of plant-based substances, Pproducers, the farmers (often in poor countries) who grow poppies and marijuana, don’t benefit greatly from our current systems. They are at risk of loss of their crops, at the least, when enforcement agencies choose to destroy them. They are often small operations, and if so, they have no power to protect themselves.

Does legalization of drugs work?

Portugal is the only major country where marijuana (the substance most similar to soma in its effects and relative harmlessnessinnocuousness) is truly legal. They seem happy with their 5-year experience of legality and medicalization of drug misuse and abuse. They have seen a slight, and encouraging, decline in the use of mind-altering substances by youth.. (Szalavitz, 2009)

What makes their situation different from the Brave New World’s is, of course, the absence of soma. Many of the drugs that Portugal is dealing with cause horrible side effects, as noted above, and their use is really a form of victimhood. The government has been able to spend more money on treatment and less on law enforcement. However,, but it is still trying to help people get over and heal from the use of powerful and dangerous substances, not promote their use. We really have no model in the real world that mimics the Brave New World’s.

‘Dear little bottle of mine’: Cloning makes governing simpler

The other major tool that the Brave New World’s government uses for control is cloning. or, as the Controller puts it, “.ectogenesis, neo-Pavlovian conditioning and hypnopædia …”. (Huxley, Brave New World, 1965, p. 38) The way that the A.F. government performs cloning involves a great deal of tinkering with the fertilized eggs and the newly divided embryo., using centrifuging and X-rays, with genetic material during the fertilization and early cell division process All this activity is probably affecting the genetic material, (although back in 1932at the time, DNA was not described yet).

Cloning in the Brave New World It also involves a lot of poisoning, feeding, oxygen deprivation, postural changes, and temperature extremes, and such while the embryo is developing later on. These interventions result in a whole range of human ‘types’ such as the Epsilon, who mature early and do heavy, mindless work, or the Alphas, who run the world (Huxley, Brave New World, 1965, p. 10).

How realistic is this? Cloning of plants has been going on for some time now in the real world. A few animal species have been cloned, as well, largely on an experimental basis. Human cloning on any sizable scale seems to be in the distant future. However, it is fascinating to consider whether this would be a is at all desirable direction for the human race.

What do we know about cloning in the 21^st century? Cloning today requires surgical withdrawal of eggs from a live female (as it does in Huxley’s world as well). It involves manipulation of these eggs to get them out of the body, and then fertilized. This activity may subtly damage the embryo and, which may contribute to developmental problems later in life. However, the critical feature is that Itit results in creates an embryo that has the same characteristics as the ‘parent’, both good and bad.

Cloning offers a tremendous temptation to tinker

The whole process is a major temptation to select for desired genetic characteristics, or to alter them. Centrifuging the sperm can make a difference, for example. Testing individual fertilized eggs for undesirable traits (for example, Down’s Syndrome, or Tay-Sachs)genetics can allow for discarding of all but the apparently healthy fertilized eggs..

What if cloning does not ‘work’? What is the morality of cloning?

There are ethical and health questions at every point along the process. (Stafford & Mannor, 2010) (Best, 2010) Is discarding a fertilized egg murder? Furthermore, For example, what how would we deal does one do with the ‘failures’ that are not discarded and develop into viable babies? These might be considered the , the equivalent of the Epsilons, Deltas, and Gammas in the Brave New World?.

We have a huge amount of trouble today in integrating even mildly disabled people into our society humanelynot managed to find a humane way to fully integrate those who are even slightly developmentally disabled, or physically disabled, into our current society.. We can just barely manage their lifetime care, as it is. What would we do with a vast additional number! We are very uncomfortable today assigning menial labor to those with mental deficits. We would have to change completely our approach to work, education, and virtually everything!

Cloning may have unintended, unforeseen consequences

We don’t know everything about the genome, even of the simplest organisms. We don’t know the function of every part of the DNA molecule. When we select for one desired characteristic, we may be also be unknowingly selecting for an undesirable effect as well. Cloning in plants and animals preserves and reproducesspreads traits that could well be can be detrimental. , since it is a deliberate reduction in diversity and variation in a species.

Cloning is in conflict with the protection of genetic diversity

Since cloning is a deliberate reduction in diversity and variation in a species, it can leave Cloning, as noted above, leaves a population vulnerable to any newny environmental challenge. If the to which the ‘parent’ had no resistance or capacity to exploit a new condition, neither will its identical offspring. This can be quite dangerous when, for example, a disease mutates into something not experienced before.

As an example, right now, all of us eat bananas which are basically clones of one species. They are dangerously at risk for disease. A variety of breeds would help bananas to survivefight disease organisms better. This is because in any natural, varied population, some would have natural resistance, and would fight the disease successfully..

Similarly, a cloned human population would lose some of the protection that diversity offers. A cloned population, for example, of bananas, needs completely controlled environmental conditions to protect it from challenges that could wipe the every individual out. Huxley’s world provided that protection to the human population, for example through weather control and medicine.

Cloning cannot completely overcome environmental effects

Cloning cannot eliminate the effect of even tiny differences in environment during growth and development. Consider Bernard Marx, and his life-long handicaps as a result of some mistake in-vitro with a few drops of alcohol. Consider that Lenina and Fanny are differently “pneumatic” The Brave New World solves this by hatching a whole group of twins at the same time, and managing their upbringing totally. For our real world, however, we have no such controlled environment, and we would really not know what to expect, even with a genetically identical offspring. If the goal is to achieve predictability, this is a risky experiment,

Cloning is a temptation to play God

Ethicists and philosophers fear that cloning will include a temptation to tinker around with the genotype. Cloning could allow parents to tailor-make a child, with blond hair and blue eyes, and high intelligence and a perfect metabolism, which could mean that any child not so designed would be a second-class citizen. Alternatively, there could even be fads in appearance, or other trivial characteristics. Humans have a very sorry record of altering the appearance of dogs through selective breeding for appearance, without thoughtfully considering whether the bulldog’s squashed face might interfere with its breathing, or a collie’s narrow face might squash its brain!

It all sounds like eugenics, and it is!

Huxley actually seems to have thought that a bit of restraint on breeding was a sensible thing. He took note of the problems associated with over-population. He also noticed that medicine allowed the survival, to reproductive age, of individuals who would have died young in earlier eras. He noted that Wwhen genetic problems are allowed to be reproduced in the population, the result could be interpreted as a loss of evolutionary fitness (Huxley, Brave New World Revisited, 1965, p. 12). This is a really politically incorrect idea to even bring up, and Huxley would not have gotten away with making such a point these days.

There is a good reason for us to be cautious about anything that looks or sounds or smells like eugenics. We can just barely decide how to take care of our own health in our own lifetimes. How can we competently decide such things as whether to eliminate any and all embryos that shows signs of being prone to a disease, or condition that we don’t understand or cannot deal with readily?

Conclusion

In the Brave New World, cloning is only one elementpart of a cradle to grave system of control. We are very far from having the technology to do it effectively, although individuals and nations may try to exploit it.

Between soma, cloning, conditioning, sleep teachinghypnopaedia, sex, and constant reinforcement, and removal of troublemakers by exile, among other techniques, the A.F. world exercises total management of the population. Stability, not innovation or achievement, are the goals. This is so fundamentally at odds with human aspirations that it is difficult to imagine it remaining in place for long. However, the threat of this kind of government is worth remembering as we keep abreast of technology.

Works Cited

Best, B. (2010). The Implications of Cloning. Web.

Huxley, A. (1965). Brave New World (Harper Colophon ed.). New York, NY, USA: Harper and Row, Publishers.

Huxley, A. (1965). Brave New World Revisited (Harper Colophon ed.). New York, NY, USA: Harper.

Pilling, R. (2009). Bananas are clones. Web.

Stafford, K., & Mannor, M. (2010). Cloning. Web.

Szalavitz, M. (2009). Drugs in Portugal: Did Decriminalization Work? Web.