Monday, October 15, 2012

Brianna's Post (her Blogger account exploded on her this morning)


Phase 3 Prompt 3
Margret Atwood believes that Aldous Huxley’s novel, “Brave New World” is still applicable in today’s society. Brave New World is a critically acclaimed novel as well as a publically disqualified for content that is just as relevant today as it was in 1932. Brave New World has been banned in public schools and in libraries for many reasons. Some include the communistic tendencies, the graphic descriptions of sexual situations, drug related references and the fact that when reading this novel, and everyone reads it differently.
People will read the book and be able to make their own connections and their own inferences about the book. They will pull different content from the novel and be able to understand the true meaning based on their life’s experiences. Atwood describes a situation in which she found her self when reading Brave New World for the first time. “I first read Brave New World in the early 1850’s when I was 14. It made a deep impression on me, though I didn’t fully understand some of what I was reading,” (Atwood 2). Atwood goes on to describe on of the things that she did not understand. She was too young to know what a pair of knickers are and what camisoles are, but because of Huxley’s description and skill as a writer that she was able to create a mental image that served the purpose that she needed when reading about ‘zippicamiknicks’ (Atwood 2). It is because of Huxley’s skill that his novel is still widely reguarded as inappropriate.
Communism as well as the ideas behind Hitler’s totalitarianism all stem from a utopic society that has gone extremely wrong (Atwood 3). Huxley’s novel’s setting is a utopic society that is borderline communist in the ways the it conditions babies instead of raising them. That everyone has the basics of life provided for them, technology, food, sex, education, job preparation, and housing so to speak. The conditioning that Huxley describes allows for blissful ignorance. The classes, epsilons, have all the basic essentials to live, and they do not question why they cannot strive for more because of the hypneopedia conditioning (Huxley 25). The people of Huxley’s Brave New World have every happiness within arms reach and they never have to question why, everybody is truly happy because they do not know any thing different (Atwood 2). However, critics in 1932 did not like that Huxley presented communism is a positive light so to speak (Huxley 265).  In fact, many of them believed that “With the rise of Fascism in Western Europe’s and a world shaken by massive economic depression, perhaps the novel hit too close to the bone; or maybe Huxley’s harsh and unsettling vision was simply too far ahead of its time,” writes a critic named M. C. Dawson, (Huxley 265). They do not agree with what Huxley had to say about how communism was communicated through literature.
Huxley’s vivid ability to describe sexual situations also is criticized, especially at the time the novel was published. Huxley’s work is said to be way ahead of the times. He repeatedly made predictions about the world how people would interact with one another. More often then not, he was right. What else do you think he was right about?


[575]

Works Cited
Atwood, Margaret. “Everybody is Happy Now.” The Guardian. 16 November 2007: Web.
Huxley, Aldous. Brave New World,. New York: Harper & Bros., 1946. Print.

8 comments:

  1. Ms. Grover!
    Your post hit some really great points. In my opinion, this book should be banned because of it communist ideals throughout the story. Why can we sit in class and read Anne Frank and learn about Hitler's universal destruction? That is real stuff and you are forced to sit in class and learn about that kind of communism. Huxley's story is fictional and should not be banned based on that idea alone. Communism does exist and we are educated about it. Huxley's novel will not change that. I do think Huxley's novel did hit some of his future ideas almost perfectly. With the amount of technology and science that we have today, that kind of society would not be impossible to create. But I think that the difference is that not very many individuals would support it. In America we are taught to have freedom of speech and about how we are able to choose our lifestyle and destinies. I do not think Americans would support the lifestyle that Huxley created. But if the government went to poor families in Africa and promised them a life without pain, starvation, and fear things would be different! Do you think that this lifestyle is attainable in our lifetime? Why?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Brandi- Actually this is my (Brianna) post, my blogger account has decided it hates me, so here I am, just a google account user. Anyways, I think that your point about Anne Frank is really thoughtful. I hadn't considered that perspective before. I like how you said that Americans would not support a lifestyle that Huxley created. I think that in a way Americans actually do support a version of Huxley's specific life style. I think that Americans substitute feelings for technology and that is what Huxley predicted. Granted, not every person will divert feelings for technology. But it is a problem. To answer your question- I do think that this lifestyle is attainable in our lifetime. The way that technology and government are progressing suggests that our future holds communistic tendencies. Now, what I just said is not meant to hurt anyone's feelings, but this is my own personal opinion, what do you feel?

      Delete
    2. -Brandi, great post, but to answer your question...I don't know if Huxley's style of governing will be applicable in our lifestyle, but I do believe it is possible, even in America. I want to point out that Huxley's world is a product on a "Nine Years' War", taking place in 2049 A.D. (more than 1700 years before the books starting point). Think of this like the attacks of 9/11. The government gained more power and authority because of a national crisis. Wars and natural disaster give government more ability to act outside the set limits. So given that some great event that left the nation in a state of chaos, I can see the government being able to take control. Also, the process took a very long time, even with the war. After failed forced attempts to gain total control of the population (which the people resisted), the government used peaceful methods (such as closing museums) to lull the populous into submission over time. The whole process was very slow, but persistent. So yes, I can see Huxley's future come to pass.

      Delete
  2. Brianna I think you made a great post and related it well with the communist ties. I feel that Brave New World is still applicable to today's society because our society is going in the same direction as the one in Brave New World. In my Alcohol, Drugs, and Society class we have discussed the creation of prescription drugs that cure addictions and personality disorders. As well as the continued development of genetic counseling. Genetic counseling allows potential parents to choose how their baby will turn out once it's born. There are many things in our society today that look alarmingly similar to Huxley's society, what are some ways that you might see similarity's?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Dustin! Thank your for your comment. To answer your question, the similarities that I can see are: our ability to classify ourselves. I do not think that we classify ourselves as severely as BNW. But we have a definite class system. I see that we have the upper class (alphas) who have the best jobs and make the most money. We have our Betas more so the middle class who make a good comfortable living, but they don't have the same social stigma. The lower class is more specifically the Deltas and the Epsilons. They have the jobs that no one else wants, but the jobs need to be done for society to function. They make just enough to scrounge by. I also see a similarity that technology is the center of our attention just as it is in BNW. What do you think?

      Delete
  3. I think one main similarity is the amount of control that the government has over it's society. Brianna I think you are right. The world has made many advancements is all sections of technology. Think about how much a cell phone, computer, and music players have changed just in the last decade. I am sure that there is a lot of things "in the making" technology wise that we have no idea about. Technology is only dangerous though if it is put in the wrong hands. Even though our society is advanced, I believe that the government still has morals. Well enough not to preprogram the entire Untied States into being perfect robot citizens.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Great post, Brianna! As we witnessed with Hitler, it only takes one man to corrupt the morals of many good men. I believe that if the future of our society is to follow in the footsteps of the society in a Brave New World, then it probably won't be the government. I bet that if Steve Jobs had desired to brainwash our society through the use of technology with Apple products, he could have easily done so. To an extent, he unintentionally did. Our society has changed dramatically these past few years. The iPhone became so accessible to the world that even young elementary school children have iPhones. At such a young and impressionable age, imagine what technology in the wrong hands could do to the youth of our society? They could easily brainwash and condition young children with iphones or other smartphones through apps. Do you think parents really closely examine each app that their child might download? It seems conceivable that one person could create a popular fun app for children that is in actuality a brainwashing tool without them realizing it. As Michelle said, technology is only dangerous in the wrong hands. However, with great technology being so easily accessible by everyone we should all be wary and continue to question the world around us at all times.

    ReplyDelete
  5. i really enjoyed you post! i think its important that you pointed out that every person will take something different from the situations in the book, according to their life experiences and there views on certain subjects. This book has so many meanings, and lessons that can be taken from it, itll be an injustice to approach it with a closed mind.

    ReplyDelete