I don’t know much about the 1930s,
during which this book was written, other than that it was the time of the
Great Depression. But, it seems that during this time there must have been a
fear or at least skepticism and curiosity of what the assembly line would
bring, given that this book poses the absurd notion of babies being produced
along a slow moving assembly line that creates perfect humans made to fit their
jobs. But what is even more striking in some ways then the assembly line is the
question of sexuality. Brave New World talks about how in the old world,
before Ford Motors took over, monogamy was stressful to follow and that having
a family of mother, father, and children was like a cult, with everyone in
close proximity and the mother stressing over her children. The new society got
rid of this presumed problem of family by having babies scientifically made and
raised and getting rid of monogamy altogether. In this society, every one
belongs to each other and as such they are expected to have sex with many
people. Even while in a relationship, which shouldn’t last more than a few
months, the people involved are seeing others on the side. Also this sexuality
is started as young as six where the children in the facility are enjoying “erotic
games” with each other.
This look at society seems very
different from The Handmaid’s Tale, and today’s societies which are both
concerned with the idea that society is too promiscuous. Today’s society is trying to teach kids about
abstinence, as well as trying to keep married couples from turning to divorce
through counseling and other means. The Handmaid’s Tale on the other
hand took sexuality and allure out of the process and made relationships and sex
strictly a way of procreating. These methods are very different from Brave
New World where procreation isn’t necessary and being promiscuous is which
talks of the differences between the two time periods. The 1930s thought being
promiscuous would help society while today’s period thinks it hurts. This leads
me to wonder which is better or worse, because neither way of looking at it looks
preferable. It also questions whether humans are destined to continuously go
from one extreme to another, as we did in reality move from monogamy to
promiscuity, all the while wondering if the other way was better.
I can't get my post to work, so I'm putting it here...
ReplyDeleteIn chapters 1 and 2 of Brave New World, Huxley's writing style did not seem particularly unique. Especially after reading The Road, it appeared very straightforward and lacking a specific voice. However, on pages 35-46, in each new paragraph Huxley switches between three separate and very different scenes: the Controller explaining the horrors of the previous society, Henry Foster and the Assistant Predestinator in the men's locker room, and Lenina and Fanny in the women's locker room. At first, I found these sections to be disjointed and confusing. After further examination though, there did appear to be connections between the scenes' content.
For example, on page 37 the Controller portrays a home as "understerilized," full of "darkness, disease, and smells." This description is then immediately juxtaposed with the image of Lenina in the bath. On 42, Fanny reveals to the reader that conventionality is a major value of the society. Her comments are followed by the Controllers assertions about the necessity of stability. One might then assume (based on the proximity of these two paragraphs) that this society has enforced conformity as an ideal so as to ensure the stability of an otherwise unstable culture. On page 45, the Controller explains to the students that the current society has relieved people of the "horrible emotions" they once felt. Directly after this claim, Huxley switches to an image of Bernard, enraged by the discussion between Mr. Foster and the Assistance Predestinator. Apparently, not all the "horrible emotions" of the time before have dissapated.
I found this section of the book to be intriguing because it reveals Huxley's style, which had previously seemed unremarkable. He appears to be able to instill meaning within the confusion of his writing. The proximity of unrelated ideas imply connections between them.
Nastasia, I'm not sure if Huxley is saying that promiscuity would help his society. The citizens of his world seem pacified by drugs and sex, but there is still a sense of loneliness and sterility in the world despite that sexual freedom. I think both Atwood and Huxley are using extremes to caution us against them. If we try to regulate any approach to human love and sexuality, we will ultimately lose that battle.
ReplyDeleteLaura, I find your observations about style to be quite interesting. Chapter 3 is a real deviation from traditional structure, and it's true that Huxley uses this shift to draw connections between unrelated ideas. He also shows us the fragmentation of the society in which the characters exist. Because they have been engineered to be somewhat shallow in their focus, Huxley uses this fragmented narrative to demonstrate that shallowness, in my opinion.
ReplyDelete