book discussion

It seems to me that the society displayed in the book is rather hard to classify as one or the other. The majority of the people seem truly happy for the most part, however, those running it and those who are aware realize how whacked it seems. What are your thoughts?

It's funny to think but I would say the society is a Utopia. The masses don't know any better because they are born and bred not to know. It's hard for us to accept but, these people are truly happy with their "gram a day". Of course we wouldn't want to be ignorant robots. But, i think sometimes I wish I could just forget all the hate, all the war and all the other bad things in life. Ignorance as they say is bliss.

But what is "truly happy?" Just that euphoric, drugged state? I think that all those ignorant workers would have some doubts about how empty their lives are. Most of the time they'd probably be too high to realize it, though. But there would always be something missing. Something inside every poor, bred-to-be-dumb worker that would yell "I don't understand!"

Neither. It lies between and simply is. With the positives of hedonism and self indulgent freedom contrasting with the negative of discrimination and death the world of a Brave New World is neither hell nor heaven. It is simply a possible future that exists to be judged by it's merits and in light of the readers own personal positions.

It's interesting to me that you would say that hedonism and self-indulgence are positives. I would think that all of that would make people less happy, not more. Self-indulgence usually comes at someone else's cost. (Maybe not harmless things like chocolate cravings, but indulging our darker whims can be very destructive.) If everybody is self-indulgent this way, everybody's hurting each other all the time. How can there be happiness?

I've always thought of Brave New World as a Dystopia paired with 1984. Both are about governments that have completely taken away personal liberty and freedom; both show one person becoming aware of the control and thus trying to free himself from it; both show how difficult (if not impossible) it is to break out of a totalitarian state. It is just the means of control between the two Dystopias that differ: in 1984 you have a dictatorial, violently oppressive government, much like the ex-Soviet Union, that control through explicit power, propaganda and a constant sense of need and crisis. In Brave New World, you have a passively oppressive government, much like the United States, that controls through hidden power, propaganda and a constant sense of fulfillment and calm. As far as happiness, in 1984, the Prols are happy in ignorance, as, actually, are most of the others; in Brave New World almost everyone is happy in ignorance. In neither, however, does that happiness equate with utopia, because in both it is just part of the Government's plan to keep people powerless. I think for both authors, a Utopia would have to be grounded in true democracy, civil liberties and individual freedom.

I agree with Diana and I wanted to add that in addition to deomocracy, civil liberties, and individual freedom, these authors would also argue for the freedom of the press and most importantly people who critically think for themselves and evaluate their own societies. In both 1984 and Brave New World there are characters that don't fit in the social strictures of their communities. They think outside the box. In both worlds you see a highly controlled media brainwashing and controlling the masses. Have you spent any time in a typical high school classroom lately? Not all of them, but many are interested only in pleasure - mall, car, clothes, cell phones, ipods, and they have little to no idea what else is going on in the world. What I get from both these books is that there is nothing more dangerous that a society that allows itself to be apathetic in their pleasures and controlled by their media. They may be happy, but the only truely free characters in both those novels are unhappy - I think that is fairly significant in terms of what is really important in society.

I'm a high schooler, and I know exactly what you mean, Bryn. But what do you mean by that last statement? Significant in terms of what is important TO society? Like the iPods and such. I agree with you there. Society's wants and views are generally pointless and designed to create business. Take today's version of fashion/beauty, for instance. It's been created by advertising executives to support the cosmetics industry.

I meant that the concept of happiness as it stands in the world today is very in the moment and based on physical and materialistic values like you said. If I'm thin/rich/beautiful/ then I'm happy. If I have a BMW then I am happy. In both those books you have characters who go against the norm and are consequently very unhappy. In their respective societies viewpoint, what those characters are doing is stupid, because they are not happy. My argument is that perhaps true happiness is a little bit of unhappiness. It's sort of a paradox. For instance, hard work isn't fun, but supporting yourself and accomplishing something valuable to yourself and the world is fulfilling - a type of happiness that isn't in the moment, but lasts a whole lot longer. You have to be a little unhappy to achieve a deeper happiness. What do you think?

Hey all--

First let me say that I find it enormously optimistic that as a high schooler, Meh, you see that all the products of happiness are our society's way of buying you off. In our Brave New World-ish society, consumer choice tends to be substituted for political choice and freedom is redefined as the freedom to buy and own whatever you want. In fact, patriotism has been redefined as the duty to buy and thus to keep the economy going (remember after 9/11 when Bush declared America Open for Business). I think neither author is arguing for a cult of unhappiness (in Brave New World, that's sort of what the savage represents, and in the end, he is no more empowered through his beating himself as anyone else is through their happiness). But I think for both authors, writing in the times of rising fascism and the failed promise of communism (BNW written in 1932 and 1984 written in 1949), the ideal society would dedicate itself to empowering individuals, politically, socially and economically, and would have the Government serving the people, rather than the people serving the state (or the market, which is a lot of what happens in the US).