Humanity, despite Huxley and Zamyatin illustrating two different types of dystopia where servitude is commonplace, manages to hold on to the remnants of hope which can be found in numerous (and sometimes unexpected) places.
Soma, described by Mustapha Mond as ‘euphoric, narcotic, pleasantly hallucinant’, is a drug that took ‘six years [sic] [to be] produced commercially’. It offers the conditioned society hope by giving them a way to always be happy; ‘a gramme of soma’ can cure anything in their eyes, apart from a ‘glum Marx’ . However, in all actuality it doesn’t offer hope but rather gives the illusion of hope. Instead, it controls the population, enslaving them with happiness. In chapter seven, Lenina ‘[feels] in her pocket for her soma – only to discover that, by unprecedented oversight, she had left the bottle down at the rest-house’ . This horrifies her as she has to ‘face the horrors of Malpais unaided’ as well as exemplifying how reliant they are on soma, which draws parallels to a modern society. Even if doctors don’t always prescribe us a variety of mood altering pharmaceutical drugs to tranquilise and sedate us, many people choose to seek them out illegally. Contra to Marx who said the ‘religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people’ , soma is the religion of the people. It is much like how we can become the slave of technology – it can be our master, as it has lost its human purposes. It is now used to restrict human conduct and human choice quite significantly. Mond mentions how soma is like‘Christianity without the tears’ , which goes on to solidify how religion and soma function in the same way – they both giv...
... middle of paper ...
...inated to be a utopia. It is impossible to remove all the rebels against a system, ‘there is no final revolution. Revolutions are infinite’.
To conclude, both We and Brave New World contain glimmers of hope, but in the latter novel, I feel as though Huxley offers no hope that society can be altered. Brave New World, in my opinion, was written as a warning to the world to change course or less turn into the dystopia depicted in the book and judging by society in places like Russia, we are not short of a worldwide dictatorship. We, however, ends ambiguously with One State’s future unclear. This could be taken to be hopeful as birds are repopulating the city and people start to commit acts of social rebellion, breaking the chains of One State’s oppression.
Works Cited
Huxley, Aldous. Brave New World. New York: Harper Perennial Modern Classics, 2006. Print.
In Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, truth and happiness are falsely engineered to create a perfect society; the belief of the World Controllers that stability is the the key to a utopian society actually led to the creation of an anti-utopian society in which loose morals and artificial happiness exist. Huxley uses symbolism, metaphors, and imagery to satirize the possibiliy of an artificial society in the future as well as the “brave new world” itself.
Brave New World is an unsettling, loveless and even sinister place. This is because Huxley endows his "ideal" society with features calculated to alienate his audience. Typically, reading Brave New World elicits the very same disturbing feelings in the reader which the society it depicts has notionally vanquished - not a sense of joyful anticipation. Huxley's novel presents a startling view of the future which on the surface appears almost comical. His intent, however, is not humor. Huxley's message is dark and depressing. His idea that in centuries to come, a one-world government will rise to power, stripping people's freedom, is not a new idea. What makes Huxley's interpretation different is the fact that his fictional society not only lives in a totalitarian government, but takes an embracive approach like mindless robots. For example, Soma, not nuclear bombs, is the weapon of choice for the World Controllers in Brave New World. The world leaders have realized that fear and intimidation have only limited power; these tactics simply build up resentment in the minds of the oppressed. Subconscious persuasion and mind-altering drugs, on the other hand, appear to have no side effects.
Several conflicting frames of mind have played defining roles in shaping humanity throughout the twentieth century. Philosophical optimism of a bright future held by humanity in general was taken advantage of by the promise of a better life through sacrifice of individuality to the state. In the books Brave New World, 1984, and Fahrenheit 451 clear opposition to these subtle entrapments was voiced in similarly convincing ways. They first all established, to varying degrees of balance, the atmosphere and seductiveness of the “utopia” and the fear of the consequences of acting in the non-prescribed way through character development. A single character is alienated because of their inability to conform – often in protest to the forced conditions of happiness and well being. Their struggle is to hide this fact from the state’s relentless supervision of (supposedly) everything. This leads them to eventually come into conflict with some hand of the state which serves as the authors voice presenting the reader with the ‘absurdity’ of the principles on which the society is based. The similar fear of the state’s abuse of power and technology at the expense of human individuality present within these novels speaks to the relevance of these novels within their historical context and their usefulness for awakening people to the horrendous consequences of their ignorance.
Huxley and Niccol demonstrate in their fictionist stories that humanity cannot be changed and cannot be controlled; it is just what it is. The government cannot create a society, nobody can, a society is self-made, and all we can do is be a part of it. Nevertheless, the main purpose of these stories is that we as humans need to stay humans, we need to stay a society; and there are so many changes that are being made in today’s times, but don’t let that change our humanistic ways.
I chose to read Brave New World by Aldous Huxley because I heard it was a great story and an easy read. After reading the first page I was attached because it was very detailed and seemed like it had a cool plot. Although it did confuse me at some parts, I would still say this book was a good read. While reading this I thought about my family and how important they are to me. Another theme that really caught my attention was how technology is really changing this world. The last thing that really captured me was genetically modifying organisms and humans while advancing in science and technology. Although I came across parts throughout
middle of paper ... ... You don’t have a revolution in which you love your enemy, and you don’t have a revolution in which you are begging the system of exploitation to integrate you into it. Revolutions overturn the systems. Revolutions destroy the systems.”
Before examining how utopias rob individuals of their identities, it is important to note the large cultural differences between the present in Brave New World and the modern-day present to show how utopias cannot function even in a highly technologically advanced future. A common phrased used by most of the characters in the novel is, “Oh, Ford!” (Huxley 21) as opposed to “Oh, God!” in modern-day language. This shows how the Brave New World society views Henry Ford, one of the fathers of modern technology, as its deistic figure. The manner in which Henry Ford is viewed is similar to the way ‘God’ is viewed in the present day, as the omniscient, omnipotent figure. Likewise, the futuristic society is one driven largely by the consumption of drugs, spe...
The characters in Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World represent certain political and social ideas. Huxley used what he saw in the world in which he lived to form his book. From what he saw, he imagined that life was heading in a direction of a utopian government control. Huxley did not imagine this as a good thing. He uses the characters of Brave New World to express his view of utopia being impossible and detrimental. One such character he uses to represent the idealogy behind this is Bernard Marx.
Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World portrays a society in which science has clearly taken over. This was an idea of what the future could hold for humankind. Is it true that Huxley’s prediction may be correct? Although there are many examples of Huxley’s theories in our society, there is reason to believe that his predictions will not hold true for the future of society.
Undoubtedly, the thought of living in, or forming a utopian society has flashed through nearly every person’s mind. A few people have even tried to make this ideal dream society a reality. Unfortunately, within the pursuit of these societies the leaders become corrupt and begin to become paranoid with the fear of rebellion. Hundreds of people were murdered during the reigns of Adolph Hitler and Joseph Stalin in what they considered measures to maintain peace and stability within their respective “perfect” society. One must also consider the hardships that the citizens were forced to endure while living under these oppressive governments.
The impracticality of the utopian ideal is explored in Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four and Huxley’s Brave New World. Both authors suggest that a lack of familial bonds, the repression of human individuality, and the repression of artistic and creative endeavors in order to attain a stable environment renders the achievement of a perfect state unrealistic. The lack of familial bonds, in both novels, contributes to the development of a dystopian society. This lack of familial bonds is evident through genetic engineering, the use of names, and a commonly used drug, soma.
Huxley effectively uses distortion in Brave New World in his depiction of Soma as a replacement for religion. Soma is a rationed narcotic that is emphasized by the government to help the people escape from their problems. The people of Utopia have become dependent on the drug to keep them in a constant state of pleasure. In their "perfect" society there is no escape from happiness. The primary example of the degrading effects of Soma is Linda. Brought back from the Savage Reservation after being left behind pregnant, Linda faced many moral and ethical dilemmas she chose to avoid. Her addiction to Soma, which is looked upon as a good thing by everyone except John, brings about the terrible end to her life in which she was in a state of constant delusion. Soma, as Mustapha Mond puts it, is "Christianity without tears" (244). Soma, in effect, is the key to social stability in Utopia. Soma prevents uprisings, saves revolutions and suppresses emotions. Although Huxley's distortion of religion is powerful, there are other strong arguments in the book.
In Brave New World, Aldous Huxley deftly creates a society that is indeed quite stable. Although they are being mentally manipulated, the members of this world are content with their lives, and the presence of serious conflict is minimal, if not nonexistent. For the most part, the members of this society have complete respect and trust in their superiors, and those who don’t are dealt with in a peaceful manner as to keep both society and the heretic happy. Maintained by cultural values, mental conditioning, and segregation, the idea of social stability as demonstrated in Brave New World is, in my opinion, both insightful and intriguing.
There were quite a few changes made from Aldous Huxley’s, Brave New World to turn it into a “made for TV” movie. The first major change most people noticed was Bernard Marx’s attitude. In the book he was very shy and timid toward the opposite sex, he was also very cynical about their utopian lifestyle. In the movie Bernard was a regular Casanova. He had no shyness towards anyone. A second major deviation the movie made form the book was when Bernard exposed the existing director of Hatcheries and Conditioning, Bernard himself was moved up to this position. In the book the author doesn’t even mention who takes over the position. The biggest change between the two was Lenina, Bernard’s girlfriend becomes pregnant and has the baby. The screenwriters must have made this up because the author doesn’t even mention it. The differences between the book and the movie both helped it and hurt it.
Brave New World, by Aldous Huxley, portrays a future society where people are no longer individuals but are controlled by the World State. The World State dominates the people by creating citizens that are content with who they are. Brave New World describes how the science of biology and psychology are manipulated so that the government can develop technologies to change the way humans think and act. The World State designs humans from conception to this society. Once the humans are within the society, the state ensures all people remain happy.