Comparing Brave New World By Aldous Huxley And Player Piano

1797 Words4 Pages

The Loss of Meaning and Purpose in Dystopia Fact (Attempt 1) Though Brave New World and Player Piano were originally written in 1931 and 1952 respectively, they, along with dystopia on the whole, remain immensely well-read to this day as thought experiments of societies gone awry. These fictitious accounts continue to be relevant because of their foresightful warnings about the future of reality, each one distinct and thought-provoking. While the two authors formulate their warnings using similar plot structures and techniques, Aldous Huxley writes of societal conformity in Brave New World, and Kurt Vonnegut writes of the consequences of automation in Player Piano. Misconception (Attempt 2) Some only see dystopia as a fictional account of …show more content…

Huxley applies the above techniques to warn against the loss of meaning in a world of societal conformity. For the first movement of the novel, Bernard acts as an outsider who does not take pleasure in regular societal activities. After his first date with Lenina, Bernard longs for something missing from his life. “I want to know what passion is,” he says. “I want to feel something strongly” (Huxley 94). Huxley uses Bernard’s feelings at the beginning of Brave New World to expose a severe lack of meaning in Bernard’s own life. Huxley later shifts his focus to John the Savage to support his warning. In his climactic conflict with Mustapha Mond, John demands that things should come with more emotional cost in the World State society, arguing, “What you need is something with tears for a change” (Huxley 245). It is with this argument that Huxley confirms his warning: the loss of meaning in life. Mond says of society, “We don’t [like inconveniences]. We prefer to do things comfortably” (Huxley 246). But as John points out, an overemphasis on comfort leads to the sacrifice of responsibilities and hardships that make life meaningful. On the other hand, Vonnegut applies the same techniques to warn against the loss of purpose in an age of automation. Vonnegut’s vision of Ilium, New York, sees that automation has displaced thousands of citizens to menial jobs in construction or the army, while only the citizens with the highest evaluation scores are eligible to be hired for high-paying engineering jobs that oversee the machines. A father’s personal tale of heartbreak reveals this flaw to the protagonist, Paul Proteus. “[My son] just about killed himself studying up for [the National General Classification Tests],” the man says, “but it wasn’t any use. He didn’t do nearly well enough for college. There were only twenty-seven openings, and six hundred kids trying for them”

Open Document