Aldus Huxley

’s Brave New World Essay, Research Paper

Aldous Huxley s Brave New World, was a very odd book. It portrays many of the moral

dilemmas that we now are approaching in our society. I really enjoyed the book, it had just

enough science fiction content to keep the reader interested in the book. It also had a very

interpretive content in it to mesmerize, and elude the reader. I related myself to, two of the

characters. During the opening quarter of the book, I related Bernard Marx to me. I am

much different from the average teenager, I am sort of an outsider much like Bernard

Marx. Bernard Marx was someone who was regarded as an outsider because of his height,

mentality, and originality of ideas. I am an outsider because I enjoy indulging my mind in

science and math, but I also enjoy being alone. I do not like being around other people

constantly like the people in A Brave New World. They are taught at a very young age that

it was wrong to be alone for an extended period of time. Later in the book when John the

savage was introduced, I related myself to him. He was a stranger to a planet that he had

always lived on. I am beginning to feel the same way. The closer I come to graduation, the

more foreign my world is becoming. I have lived on this planet for seventeen years, and I am

just now beginning to learn what it is all about. The book taught me that it is O.K. to be

different. If you are not, the world would be a very boring place. Everything would be the

same, there would be no surprise. There is almost no reason to live. When people are

different, it adds a variety to society. An almost infinite number of possibilities to everything,

which adds an element of surprise, because you do not know exactly what to expect. The

point of view that Aldous Huxley chose, was a third person, or omniscient point of view.

This point of view was vital to the book. Had he not used this point of view, the book would

have been almost impossible to write. Or it would have taken him a much longer amount of

time to illustrate what was happening in the book. He uses many of the thoughts of the

various characters to give a feeling of the over all book. If he had used a different point of

view, you could not get this feeling from the characters as well. But the point of view he did

use, did make it a little confusing. Aldous Huxley would begin to jump from person to

person, and sometimes it was hard to follow. Since the narrator was in third person, he used

some terminology that was either made up, or not commonly known, because he was all

knowing. The title of the story was stated by John the savage many times after he visits the

outside world of his reservation. He got it from one of Shakespeare s works called The

Tempest. He used this quote to portray the similarities of society he sees, and the play The

Tempest. Aldous Huxley used the opening pages to set up a parameter for what the society

of the story is like. He describes the method of creating life without a mother or father. He

also answers some questions such as why the society was created, what is socially

acceptable, and what isn t. He spends the entire first forty pages describing what this brave

new world are like. The major characters of the story were: Lenina Crowne, Henry Foster,

Hemholtz Watson, John the savage, Linda, Bernard Marx, Mustapha Mond, and Thomas. A

description of each is listed below. Lenina Crowne. Lenina Crowne was a freemartin who

was a pretty girl who was just like any other girl in this society, she believed in having sex

with anyone she wants. It frustrates her much when John would not do it because he loved

her. Lenina did not understand what love was, she believed that everyone belongs to

everyone else. She was a little different than normal girls, because she had dated one man

for a fairly long time, but since that was socially unacceptable, she decided to go on a

holiday with Bernard Marx. Henry Foster. Henry Foster was a scientist in the Hatchery. He

was the ideal person of this society. Although he does not do much in the story, he does help

set up the parameter for the society during the first part of the book. Hemholtz Watson.

Hemholtz Watson was a man who began to realize that there was something more to life

than just sex, drugs, hypnop dia, and work. When John the savage comes along and

introduces him to the work of Shakespeare, he begins to learn more about what things should

be. Although in the end, his conditioning keeps him from going any deeper than that. He

only scratches the surface. John the savage. John the savage, was raised by a mother which

was unheard of in this culture. He was raised on a reservation in New Mexico, in which

Lenina and Bernard take a holiday to. Before Bernard takes him back to London, John gets

a hold of some works from Shakespeare. These works of Shakespeare, enlighten him beyond

what he had learned from his mother and from the savages on the reservation. John was

troubled deeply by the death of his mother. She dies by an overdose of soma, which was

really planned. John could not understand why everybody thought of her death as no big

deal, and that just added to his pain. And Lenina wanting to have sex with him also hurt him

because he wanted love, and she just wanted sex. Both of these factors are what initially

drove him to suicide. Linda. Linda was John s mother. She becomes pregnant by Thomas.

That was quite ironic for today, because I always here about someone using a condom and

birth control, and yet still becoming pregnant. That just illustrates that man was meant to

bare children regardless of all the precautions taken. Living quite some time in this savage

reservation, she grows old and fat, because she did not have the drugs with her to keep her

looking young. Bernard Marx. Bernard Marx was one of the most original men in this entire

society. He has original ideas, which as a result, gets him sent to Iceland. Bernard was the

man who makes arrangements to have John go to the brave new world. Bernard was also

excluded from a part of the community because people hypothesize that too much alcohol

was added to his bottle during fetal development, which stunted his growth. So was

considered of someone of a lower caste. He was enjoying being unhappy which is part of his

freedom, but socially unacceptable. Mustapha Mond. Mustapha Mond was one of ten

controllers in the world. He is an incredibly intelligent man compared to the rest of the

people in the society. He uses his intelligence, and deductive reasoning for the good of this

society. He makes the rules so therefore he can break them, so he has read all of the

forbidden books such as the bible, and works by Shakespeare. When he was Bernard s age,

he also had a chance to go to one of the remote islands, but he decides to take the job of a

controller. Which made him a very powerful man that is also intelligent, the most dangerous

of combinations. This helps this society flourish. Thomas. Thomas was the director of

hatcheries and conditioning. He does not have a real major part in the story, but he was

John s biological father, and when John came back to London, Thomas was completely

humiliated, and was forced to resign. The ending of the story was strange. Although you

anticipate that John will commit suicide, you do not really expect it. But all-in-all, I though

the ending was very satisfactory. The ending appealed to real life. Many people commit

suicide because they are unable to deal with real life situations such as John s. The setting of

the story played a major part of the story. Primarily the time of the story was the most

important, and from that came the sub-settings. The time is about 534 years in the future.

From time, came futuristic buildings, flying machines, drugs, and a twisted society. Such as

when Lenina and Bernard are in the helicopter over the ocean. The ocean symbolizes a

loneliness, which is what they are programmed to hate, that is one example why the setting

was important to the story. The society of the story, much of which has already been

explained, is a very bizarre twisted one. To start of, people have no mother s or father s.

They are all hatched out of bottles so-to-speak. There are several social class ranks. Each of

the ranks, or castes, are adapted to do a certain job at the beginning of development. They

may add a sickness to the bottle, or add alcohol to stunt growth. After they are ready to be

hatched, they start the hypnop dia, or sleep teaching. They are taught not facts, but morals,

and emotions. They are taught to like only one s caste, hate solitude, be insensitive to death,

want sex, want drugs, and so on. All of these things create a very strange society where

everybody has sex with everybody else, and when anything bad happens, they just go on a

soma (drug) holiday (high or stoned). So they never have to deal with any painful reality.

The themes of the book, are very direct. The major one would be: With the advancement of

science, we need to be careful with it. It may someday turn against us, and without us

knowing it, change our lives in a very bad way, but most will not even notice or care. With

the recent advancement in cloning, this theme plays a particular role to us as a society

today.: Without a mother and a father, it is difficult for most to learn how to behave and act,

and that is a main reason why promiscuity is such a big part of the people s lives in the

society. Happiness and freedom are also the subject of a theme: Happiness is not always the

same for all people. The same as freedom. Some people may see their freedom as the

freedom to be happy, and unhappy. In this society, people for the most part do not have a

choice. They have happy, or they have a soma holiday. Sex is also a subject of a theme:

Love is a virtue, you should live it and love it, because in this book, sex is thought of as

nothing more than a drug. Love has nothing to do with sex in this book, which is part of the

reason why John is hurt so bad by Lenina when she practically throws herself on John.

Genetic engineering, and other scientific advancements are explored thoroughly in this book,

but I hope politicians do not view this book as what could happen if cloning experiments

continue, because I do not believe that anything like this would ever happen as a result of

these experiments. But it does raise some moral issues about cloning that are currently on the

hot plate in political offices. Bill Clinton has banned all federal aided, or funded programs

that deal with cloning, because the issues still have not been resolved, such as: Will the clone

have a soul? In this book, it is almost portrayed that they do not have a soul. And the only

one in the book who has been born by a mother, John, actually acts as if he does have a soul.

I believe that the author s purpose for writing the book was to warn us that science may

begin to destroy what we value most in life such as love. He is trying to get us to reevaluate

what we are actually doing to out world, and what it may become. Some cause effect

relationships include: The nine years war, caused this Utopia (literal meaning: land of no

place), because people after the war just wanted a stability, so science created this utopia to

satisfy everyone, and no one objected, because they were happy. Another relationship

includes: Fanny s argument with Lenina caused Lenina to go to Bernard, and accept his

offer to take a holiday to New Mexico. If she had not gone on this holiday, Bernard may not

have gone, and then most of the book could not have been written. And yet another

relationship includes: Foster went to New Mexico with Linda, and Linda got lost and

injured, which caused her to stay in the reservation and have the baby. Had she been in

London, the baby would have been aborted, because it is socially unacceptable to bare live

young. One of the statements that the narrator made was especially prominent to me, and

that was Straight from the horse’s mouth. Although not original, it does portray that the

society is almost unable to generate an original idea by themselves. Another statement is

Electro-magnetic golf was a waste of time. Then what is time for? This illustrates, that

time has not any real meaning there, and yet in a sense it does, when the rocket is a few

minutes late, it is scandalously late. Another one is Ford. They often use the word Ford in

place of Christ or God. This symbolizes the replacement of God with science and

technology. The author’s style in this book is simple, he uses a fairly equal balance between

dialog, and description. But he also uses either made up words, or scientific words such as

hypnop dia, caste, surrogate, viviparous, and flivver. But other wise, his book is fairly easy

to read and follow. Why did the author have John kill himself? I believe that Aldous Huxley

did it to illustrate, that in this world, you can either give in to the horrid Utopia, or die, and I

think that Linda also chose to die because of the condition. Would you or I enjoy living in

this Utopia? I would not enjoy it, perhaps it is the way I have been conditioned, but

none-the-less, I could not because I enjoy unhappiness in a sense, I also enjoy love, hate, and

the feeling I get during solidarity. Will Bernard, in the long run, enjoy, and be truly happy in

Iceland? I think he will enjoy the rest of his life in Iceland, because that is where he can be

truly himself, and not what hypnop dia created him to be. I am sure he will find a true love,

and get married. But this might be my escape literature side speaking also. Do you think that

cloning or genetic engineering is morally and ethically acceptable? I believe that I am what I

make myself to be. My genetics play a part in my make up, but it is not all of me. Half of

what people are, are their experiences, their environment. And from that, I believe that their

soul is created. Do you think that this Utopia could ever exist I think that something close to

this could exist, but the overall experience of the book, is just to far great for it to ever exist.

People enjoy their freedom to do whatever they choose, including, being happy, unhappy,

mad, furious, vengeful, and all of the rest of the feelings that can be defined. If these

freedoms were taken away, people would then be unhappy, and people generally like to be

unhappy all of the time. Author question: Did you write this book to actually warn us, or did

you write it to astound us? I believe he would say he wrote it to astound us, because he has

written many science fiction novels. I think that he added the warning part in on purpose, but

that wasn t the real reason for writing the book What were your personal reasons for writing

this book? I cannot answer this question, because I have not read enough of his books, or

essays to really understand why he writes at all.

If I would have been the author, I would have ended the book by letting John go to Iceland

with Bernard. There they begin a revolutionary group that strikes at the Utopian culture, and

changes it back into something more reasonable. No more babies in a bottle, no more

everyone belongs to everyone else. Women begin to have live birth again, marriage

becomes a common thing again. And they could do all of this through the hypnop dia. The

primary reason I would do this, is because I am and escape reader. I understand interpretive

literature, but I like escape literature when I read for pleasure. The main character is not

quite definable, because half of the story was Bernard, and the other half was John, so I am

going to tell how I am like John. I am different than other people, I know things that most

teenagers do not, just like John knowing Shakespeare. Another is that I am venturing into

college territory, and it is kind of frightening, much like John is frightened by the new

society he is in. I wish to love a girl but cannot for personal reasons, Just like John, he cannot

because Lenina just wants sex. I enjoy to talk to people about knowledge and science, just

like John likes to talk to Hemholtz, about Shakespeare. I desire to change politician s views

about cloning, just like John wants to change the views of everybody about taking soma.

This book is very relevant to our day in age. It brings out the dilemmas of cloning, and

genetic engineering, but I think that it is a step back for those of us who want to continue in

the research of cloning. If politicians take this book seriously they may believe that this

could actually happen, when in reality it is just fiction, and it will never happen. This book

gave me a perspective on life, especially the part on love. It made me realize that love is one

of the true great things in life that are truly worth living for, and it may stay with me for the

rest of my life, and then again, it is fresh in my mind and I may forget about it in a few days.

One thing I will remember about this book it the statement Straight from the horse’s

mouth. That statement tells me that my originality is what is truly great about me. I do not

have to be straight from the horse’s mouth, I can be original, I can be me. This book

reminded me of something that happened to me in A.P. Biology last year. I said something,

that seemed bizarre and odd, and of course the kids laughed, but the next day I brought proof

that I was right. Why it reminded me of that, is because John tried to convince the people

that soma was bad, and they should change, and they did not like that.


ДОБАВИТЬ КОММЕНТАРИЙ  [можно без регистрации]
перед публикацией все комментарии рассматриваются модератором сайта - спам опубликован не будет

Ваше имя:


Хотите опубликовать свою статью или создать цикл из статей и лекций?
Это очень просто – нужна только регистрация на сайте.

opyright © 2015-2018. All rigths reserved.