It’s been a while
since I’ve done a review, but I hope to get back into the swing of things
before blogs become obsolete or something. Anyway, this is a book I read for
school (the last one I’ll ever read for school! EVER!). I analyzed it pretty
well since I had to write a paper on it.
First Impressions: Brave
New World isn’t a very deep book. I suppose, as with any
book, you can analyze as deeply as you wish, but I don’t see that necessary.
The characters are simple-minded, and the book is as well. The main thing I was
paying attention to while reading this was how it compared to 1984 (review here). It was an interesting contrast.
But more on that later.
Short Synopsis: Bernard Marx is
an outsider because he doesn’t like taking the “happy drug” soma. He likes to
be angry and frustrated because it feels natural. He takes a woman, Lenina (who
loves soma and everything in current society) on a vacation to see “The
Savages.” There he meets John, who grew up feeling pain and struggling. Bernard
takes John and John’s mother, Linda, back to the society with soma. Everyone
praises Bernard for bringing Savages to them and he is no longer an outsider
and, as a result, starts taking soma like everyone else and accepts how life is.
John is outraged by what society has become and tries to isolates himself, but
ends up drawing a crowd who persuades him to take soma. John realizes what he
has done and kills himself.
Bread and Circuses: One of the only authors John the Savage had access to as a child was
Shakespeare. He grows up being articulate and curious, as any child would be.
His mother, who grew up in the soma society until she was banished for becoming
a mother, can’t answer any of his questions. She has no idea why the sky is
blue, and she doesn’t care to find out. When John and Linda are in Bernard and
Lenina’s society, Linda goes on a permanent soma holiday until she dies. No one
has ever seen a middle aged woman before, so they are repulsed by her. Linda
doesn’t really mind because she has craved soma ever since she was banished.
John watches his mother die, and is bewildered when no one cares about her
death and no one understands how upset he is regarding her death. Later, when
he is talking to one of the controllers of western Europe, he is blown away by
the fact that the controller is not ignorant at all. In fact, he knows more
about art and culture than John does but he chose
not to pursue it. John has the same reaction I have. WHAT?! How could
someone be exposed to all these things and choose to live a life completely
isolated from it forever?! But John can’t reason with the man.
But really, who could
have? This society was being well fed and entertained so there was no reason
for them to question anything ever. Sure they were conditioned into the society
by listening to recordings in their sleep as children and by taking soma, but
societies today are the same way, even without drugs. There are people in this
world who have never experienced squalid living conditions and are completely
capable of noticing the corrupt conditions of the world they’re living in. But
they don’t. Why would they need to? They have all the food they want and they
have access to the extremely entertaining Internet. I’ve also met people who
think that overall, mankind is good and there are just a few bad people in the
world. They are wrong. So wrong. Overall, people are terrible and cruel and
manipulative. But, as long as you are well fed and entertained, there’s no
reason to ponder on this.
Also, I think it is
important to note that I’ve also met people who ponder a lot about the
terribleness of the world. These people are very sad and negative, although
everything they’re saying is true. So it seems like the only choices in life
are to live happy and ignore all the badness or to live miserably and focus on
the badness. I don’t agree with that statement, but I’ll talk about that
another time because that topic is an immense digression from Brave New World.
Parallels to 1984: The main parallel here is how
reading about art and culture are viewed. Orwell’s idea of a dystopian society
consisted of people who were afraid to read about art, culture, and science.
Huxley’s idea of a dystopian society consisted of people who chose not to.
Another similarity is
that society doesn’t change in the end. There’s a character (in 1984 there’s two) who wants society to
change. In 1984, the characters die
trying, but don’t get close to changing anything. John the Savage isolates
himself, which doesn’t help any, and people just think he’s weird. Both books
end with an unchanged dystopian society.
Really, though, could
Huxley’s society even be considered a dystopian society? Everyone (at least in
Western Europe) is happy and has what they want. Life is focused around
pleasure. Is that such a bad thing? John the Savage thought so. I think so.
What do you think?
Final Thoughts: Again, this book isn’t very deep in my opinion. That’s one of the reason
I like it so much. In both this and 1984
I didn’t have to analyze too much in order to understand how terrible their
world is. 1984 was just more about
realism and the darker side of dystopian societies while Brave New World is more focused on how people can be completely ok
with corruption and such things as long as they’re kept happy.
Highly recommend the
book to anyone who likes dystopian novels. Personally, after I finish Fahrenheit 451, I’m done with dystopia.
They’re all essentially the same, and the originals are the best, right? Unless
someone else suggests a good modern one, I’m moving on to other genes after Fahrenheit 451.
I have a lot of
reading to do. I keep going to the library and picking up long books that I
know I won’t get around to reading for a long time. Oh the curse of being a
bookworm!
