An interesing point that I agree with.
The problem and the promise of a dystopian novel both stem from the same place. When we start a book with dystopian themes we generally recognize much about the dynamics of the world, whether it is like ours or the opposite of ours, we as readers understand it through the lens of our current world. All speculative fiction, but especially dystopian novels, rely heavily on world building. This has long been the keystone to beloved fantasy and science fiction novels. The issue with the dystopian novel is that the world building in away has to be even more detailed. I think it is easy to assume that the reader is able to fill in the blanks more easily when they are presented with a world that is like their own, but different. But actually I find the opposite to be true; the more like our world the future world is the more questions I have about the transition between the two. (Megan, http://poseysessions.blogspot.com/)
I find myself thinking along the same lines most of the time. The more different the future world is presented, the more I start to think about what would have to happen for us to get there. Take for example, the book "Glow." In the book, there are two ships leaving Earth to find a new earth, becasue the one they live one had become to out of shape to live on. What would have to happen to our world that we would be forced to leave it, as a last resort?
(The way things are going, I wouldn't be suprsied if thats how things end up.)
Friday, February 24, 2012
Thursday, February 2, 2012
A bit taken from a forum,discussing, well, you'll see...
In Brave New World, are Huxley's predictions valid in today's society?
This would be an excellent question to post on the discussion board of this group, as I am positive you would get a wide range of responses that would be far better than just one person's thoughts. However, to add my tuppence worth, I think the society that Huxley presents us with in this unforgettable novel is clearly a society that has lurched dramatically towards one end of the spectrum of scientific advancement. Social institutions such as the family, marriage, childbirth and childrearing have been completely dispensed with and genetic engineering has created a strictly stratified world based on the Indian caste system.
While this world is obviously an extreme caricature of what might be possible if scientific advancement carries on as it seems it will, it is clear that there are not so many parallels with our society today. However, one fear is that with genetic engineering we will be able to have an increased amount of "choice" in the characteristics of our children, being able to select gender and so on.
Another fear that can be observed in the novel is the "dumbing down" of culture to the extent that we are not troubled by "serious" fiction such as Shakespeare and live lives that are easily managed and controlled.
Either way, I think this novel does present a terrifying picture of what could be if humanity in the future decides to forfeit personal freedom in its desire to gain political stability. Time will tell if we make this foolhardy and rash choice.
No, they are not, in my opinion. I think that we are nowhere near to Huxley's dystopia.
For example, we are not in any way moving towards a caste system. We don't even have tracking in American schools (where kids who don't want to go to college are put on a different "track" with different classes in high school. We want everyone to go to college instead of creating some lower class that would be happy doing the menial jobs.
We are certainly not moving towards a world where human relationships are choked off and people are supposed to treat each other like machines. In other words, we value love and things like that -- not just the random sexual encounters that Huxley portrays.
So I do not think that the major trends that Huxley describes in this book are coming to exist in our present day real world.
Aldous Huxley's Brave New World is prophetic in its concerns that technology might advance faster than humanity. The dehumanizing of the individual is clearly occurring, although we have not yet created Deltas and Episilons deliberately. But, genetic engineering is in the making as scientists have been able to isolate certain genes that cause baldness, some disabilities, etc. Cloning of animals has already occurred, of course.
The concept of "everybody belongs to everybody else" seems to be reaching modern society as gratuitous sex is quite prevalent and pornography is rampant on the internet. Another parallel with Huxley's dystopian society is the prevalence in modern society of drugs such as Prozac which relieve people of disturbing thoughts and emotions, not unlike the soma of the New World.
Earlier in this year, a guest was on The Glenn Beck Show and in response to one of Mr. Beck's questions, "Are we like 1984 or have we reached Brave New World? the guest, who is a writer, replied, "Oh, we are definitely living Brave New World. In addition to this man, there are other of the literari and the world of politicos that feel similarly.
On a couple of points, I have to respectfully disagree with you. Firstly, you stated “[…] we are not in any way moving towards a caste system.” We are not moving toward a cast system, correct, we are in a caste system. All one need do is examine people’s socioeconomic class structure in American society and you will see that there is very little – almost none whatsoever – between the classes. The poor and middle classes remain firmly in place; in fact, the middle class, if anything, move, but it’s generally in a downward direction toward poverty or financial stagnation at best. The United States is clearly one of the most classed societies on the planet, but ours aren’t determined by government, they are determined by how much money we have.
Secondly, I disagree with this point, as well: “We are certainly not moving towards a world where human relationships are choked off and people are supposed to treat each other like machines.” Indeed, relationships are choked off, as you say, all of the time; relationships at work – especially within large corporations – are generally discouraged. And these relationships are discouraged because they might cause large corporations to be embarrassed (and lose market share), or they might result in allegations of sexual harassment; both of which cost large corporations money. When you begin to see that we are not controlled by jack-booted thugs, but rather money then one begins to understand just how correct Huxley actually was. I say this even though George Orwell was a brighter and far better writer; in fact, he was my favorite. Nevertheless, Huxley appears to have been very accurate with respect to his predictions. Contrary to popular belief, Orwell wasn’t making any predictions; he was merely describing – very accurately, mind you – the inner-workings of a totalitarian society. Where, perhaps, Orwell and Huxley both agree is how we’re controlled through language. So, I do disagree I think the USA is an extremely classed society, and I think that our sexuality is being controlled – through religion, corporations, government, etc.
We discuss this quite often in my Senior Lit. class. The students themselves concluded that while we are not there yet, that America is definately moving toward the world Huxley envisioned. Here is their reasoning.
Soma: Pot smoking is the highest its been since the early 80's and is on the increase whearas alchol is on the deacrease among young people. It seems more and more teens want to block out the hard stuff through self medication.
Sex: In our district kids as young as 6th and 7th grade are experiementing with sex. There is little doubt that premarital and extramarital sex is more accepted than just a decade ago, much less a generation ago.
Cloning: We all know about Dolly the sheep. And there is further experimentation along these lines for disease alleviation and such.
Government control: Spurred on by the fear of terrorism, and laziness, our government (more than ever under Obama) is slowly grabbing control of all aspects of our lives from mandatory seat belt and no smoking laws, to socialized medicine.
Those of you in my age group (born in the 60's). Could you even imagine we would be where we are at today?
Wednesday, February 1, 2012
http://listverse.com/2008/03/12/top-12-dystopian-novels
Glad that the classics are all there. This just goes to prove that although the world is constantly evolving, some things just stay the same. Like it has been said, "The one thing that never changes about the world, is that the world always changes."
Like I was saying on my twitter, the world can never be equal, like Vonnegut's "Harrison Bergeron," because we are all different. Not only are we all different, but we acknowledge that, and celebrate these differences. (Most of us.) We are still learning to except each other, as the boys had to in "Lord of the Flies." We ALL need to learn to celebrate the diversity of our world. It would make the world much better.
As said by Q as a comment on the above link,
"The perfect thing about Brave New World is that there is really nothing wrong with it. Everyone is happy and the only purpose of the government is to keep everyone happy. Racism, crime, poorness, genetic disease, old age, filth, and selfishness are all gone. Even those who do not conform can live out their lives is full happiness on islands around the world."
Glad that the classics are all there. This just goes to prove that although the world is constantly evolving, some things just stay the same. Like it has been said, "The one thing that never changes about the world, is that the world always changes."
Like I was saying on my twitter, the world can never be equal, like Vonnegut's "Harrison Bergeron," because we are all different. Not only are we all different, but we acknowledge that, and celebrate these differences. (Most of us.) We are still learning to except each other, as the boys had to in "Lord of the Flies." We ALL need to learn to celebrate the diversity of our world. It would make the world much better.
As said by Q as a comment on the above link,
"The perfect thing about Brave New World is that there is really nothing wrong with it. Everyone is happy and the only purpose of the government is to keep everyone happy. Racism, crime, poorness, genetic disease, old age, filth, and selfishness are all gone. Even those who do not conform can live out their lives is full happiness on islands around the world."
Sunday, January 29, 2012
Taken from Wikipedia and Neil Postman's "Amusing ourselves To Death."
Social critic Neil Postman contrasts the worlds of Nineteen Eighty-Four and Brave New World in the foreword of his 1985 book Amusing Ourselves to Death. He writes:
What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one. Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information. Huxley feared those who would give us so much that we would be reduced to passivity and egotism. Orwell feared that the truth would be concealed from us. Huxley feared the truth would be drowned in a sea of irrelevance. Orwell feared we would become a captive culture. Huxley feared we would become a trivial culture, preoccupied with some equivalent of the feelies, the orgy porgy, and the centrifugal bumblepuppy. As Huxley remarked in Brave New World Revisited, the civil libertarians and rationalists who are ever on the alert to oppose tyranny "failed to take into account man's almost infinite appetite for distractions." In 1984, Orwell added, people are controlled by inflicting pain. In Brave New World, they are controlled by inflicting pleasure. In short, Orwell feared that what we fear will ruin us. Huxley feared that our desire will ruin us.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brave_New_World#Characters
A further look into the eerie similarities between our world and Brave New World's....
It is very ironic that Huxely uses the names/personalities of real people for his fictional characters, because in doing so, he is trying to make a point. I believe that Aldous Huxely is trying to show us what our World really is; A Brave New World. He creates this fictional world, with "fictional" characters, who for some reason, resemble real world people extremely creepily. Take for example, Lenina. Lenina is a pseudonym for Vladimir Lenin, a former communist politician of the Soviet Union. By using the name Lenina to resemble Lenin, Huxely makes a satirical joke. In the story, Lenina disagrees with her friend Fanny, and decides to try something new. Not completely new, like Bernard Marx does, but something a little off the status quo. Lenin, on the other hand, also disagreed with the way his government was being run. He rallied supporters, and started a partisan movement called the "Bolsheviks," and for a short time, he got to run the city.
The similarities only continue.
Take leader of Brave New World, Mustapha Mond. This fictional character is actually a stand-in for Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, the founder of Turkey after the World War I.
Ironically, Mustapha Mond also founded a whole "world," gluing it back together from the past, when all was not right.
Interestingly enough, Huxely got a few ideas from Shakespeare's "Tempest," especially from the character Miranda. Miranda says the line "Oh glorious Brave New World that has such people in it," which Huxely then uses for John the Savage to say when he enters the Brave New World. Surprisingly enough, Huxely does not have a single character with the name Miranda. Did Huxely think it would be too obvious if he used it? Did he not like it?
What do you think?
A further look into the eerie similarities between our world and Brave New World's....
It is very ironic that Huxely uses the names/personalities of real people for his fictional characters, because in doing so, he is trying to make a point. I believe that Aldous Huxely is trying to show us what our World really is; A Brave New World. He creates this fictional world, with "fictional" characters, who for some reason, resemble real world people extremely creepily. Take for example, Lenina. Lenina is a pseudonym for Vladimir Lenin, a former communist politician of the Soviet Union. By using the name Lenina to resemble Lenin, Huxely makes a satirical joke. In the story, Lenina disagrees with her friend Fanny, and decides to try something new. Not completely new, like Bernard Marx does, but something a little off the status quo. Lenin, on the other hand, also disagreed with the way his government was being run. He rallied supporters, and started a partisan movement called the "Bolsheviks," and for a short time, he got to run the city.
The similarities only continue.
Take leader of Brave New World, Mustapha Mond. This fictional character is actually a stand-in for Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, the founder of Turkey after the World War I.
Ironically, Mustapha Mond also founded a whole "world," gluing it back together from the past, when all was not right.
Interestingly enough, Huxely got a few ideas from Shakespeare's "Tempest," especially from the character Miranda. Miranda says the line "Oh glorious Brave New World that has such people in it," which Huxely then uses for John the Savage to say when he enters the Brave New World. Surprisingly enough, Huxely does not have a single character with the name Miranda. Did Huxely think it would be too obvious if he used it? Did he not like it?
What do you think?
Monday, January 23, 2012
Consider this: Dystopian Literature, such as Brave New World, has two sides to the story, like anything else.
One side believes that Huxely is writing a satirical piece of fiction, not a scientific prophecy. They believe that Brave New World is a heartless, soulless society, and that we are not. After all, we "care about our planet." - But if we care so much, how come our world is at the brink of environmental collapse? People who believe in this suggest that to achieve "universal happiness, we will be forced to give up what is dear to us. (Our planet?) People who believe that Huxely was not predicting the future say that as a society, we are in a pretty good place right now. I disagree. I think that as a society=, we have reached a new low. People are being killed because of their orientations, our economy is in a huge crisis, the conflict in the middle east still has not been resolved, our environment is slowly turning into a garbage dump, and on top of all that, we are beginning to turn to technology and drugs, rather then face the problems of our society.
The other side of this controversy are the people who believe that Aldous Huxely is a prophet. They believe that Huxely is trying to warn us of scientific utopianism. They argue that our world is driven by our fears and needs, much like BNW's. Technology in our world is advancing at a faster rate then humans are capable of adapting to, and therefore the technology of BNW could possibly achieved soon. As for the medicine in BNW, at the rate that improvements are being made, medicine will be a panacea faster then you could say "What?!?!" And, as it is evident, our world is just one, biro corporation, like Brave New Worlds.
Thoughts?
One side believes that Huxely is writing a satirical piece of fiction, not a scientific prophecy. They believe that Brave New World is a heartless, soulless society, and that we are not. After all, we "care about our planet." - But if we care so much, how come our world is at the brink of environmental collapse? People who believe in this suggest that to achieve "universal happiness, we will be forced to give up what is dear to us. (Our planet?) People who believe that Huxely was not predicting the future say that as a society, we are in a pretty good place right now. I disagree. I think that as a society=, we have reached a new low. People are being killed because of their orientations, our economy is in a huge crisis, the conflict in the middle east still has not been resolved, our environment is slowly turning into a garbage dump, and on top of all that, we are beginning to turn to technology and drugs, rather then face the problems of our society.
The other side of this controversy are the people who believe that Aldous Huxely is a prophet. They believe that Huxely is trying to warn us of scientific utopianism. They argue that our world is driven by our fears and needs, much like BNW's. Technology in our world is advancing at a faster rate then humans are capable of adapting to, and therefore the technology of BNW could possibly achieved soon. As for the medicine in BNW, at the rate that improvements are being made, medicine will be a panacea faster then you could say "What?!?!" And, as it is evident, our world is just one, biro corporation, like Brave New Worlds.
Thoughts?
http://bit.ly/yU7BbB
Great article on dystopian literature... Once again, was struck by that horrible feeling that our society is eerily similar to that of Brave New World. In our world, we have this implied maxim that in order to be socially accepted, you must act/look/be like everyone else. In both our society and the totalitarian society of Brave New World, people who look different or strange are considered outcasts, and are ostracized. I think this is a really big issue on our world, and even though it is not "life-threatining," I think that the impacts it may have on our society are great, and damaging. I found that there are several interesting parallels between the two worlds.
BNW: Our World
-soma: pot smoking
-soma: drugs
-soma: Facebook, media or television (technology)
-sex: premarital and extramarital sex are more widely accepted now
-government control: government control... So many new limitations in our governments
-"everybody belongs to everyone": polygamy
Scared?
Do not be. These are just examples that show that the wrong decisions can make this made-up world a reality.
Remember: Be aware of what you do, say, and the people around you. You never know who could be the next Lenina, and who could be the next Mustafa Mond...
Great article on dystopian literature... Once again, was struck by that horrible feeling that our society is eerily similar to that of Brave New World. In our world, we have this implied maxim that in order to be socially accepted, you must act/look/be like everyone else. In both our society and the totalitarian society of Brave New World, people who look different or strange are considered outcasts, and are ostracized. I think this is a really big issue on our world, and even though it is not "life-threatining," I think that the impacts it may have on our society are great, and damaging. I found that there are several interesting parallels between the two worlds.
BNW: Our World
-soma: pot smoking
-soma: drugs
-soma: Facebook, media or television (technology)
-sex: premarital and extramarital sex are more widely accepted now
-government control: government control... So many new limitations in our governments
-"everybody belongs to everyone": polygamy
Scared?
Do not be. These are just examples that show that the wrong decisions can make this made-up world a reality.
Remember: Be aware of what you do, say, and the people around you. You never know who could be the next Lenina, and who could be the next Mustafa Mond...
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)