"What the two men shared was the knowledge that they were individuals. But whereas the physically defective Bernard had suffered all his life from the consciousness of being separate, it was only quite recently that, grown aware of his mental excess, Helmholtz Watson had become aware of his difference from the people who surrounded him." - Brave New World, page 67.
In chapter four, the reader gets a further, more complicated insight into Bernard's personality as well as an introduction into a new character's (Helmholtz Watson) personality and problems. We already knew that Bernard was different and because of it he suffered. We learned that he was shorter than the people of his caste and in this chapter we discovered that it is difficult for him to gain respect from lower caste members who associate him with a lower caste. Bernard wants nothing more than to be able to enjoy the life he "rightfully" deserves with ALL the benefits of being an Alpha. His dissatisfication with the system is what led him into befriending Helmholtz. Helmholtz just longs for more meaning to his life and believes that he has much more to offer. Clearly, the only difference between these two people is the basis for their dislikes and compared to Helmholtz, Bernard is merely immature, childish, and quite a complainer. More importantly, I feel, is the notion that there is obviously a flaw in this "perfect" society. Not everyone is content on how they stand in life. This is mostly confirmed by an earlier scene where one Epsilon cries longingly, "Roof!...Oh, roof!" It shows how conditioning cannot totally elliminate a person's need for space, beauty, and most importantly, air!
Tuesday, June 28, 2011
Friday, June 24, 2011
Stability Anaphora
"Stability," said the Controller, "stability. No civilization without social stability. No social stability without individual stability." - Brave New World, page 42.
"Stability," insisted the Controller, "stability. The primal and the ultimate need. Stability. Hence all this." - Brave New World, page 43.
![]()
Chapter 3 was a very challenging chapter for me. It was just as much confusing as it was tiring to read. But through all that confusion I found an anaphora! That will be helpful for my Literary Terms Journal. Anyway, this anaphora helped to reiterate the concept that readers discovered in earlier chapters and that I have already discussed. Leaders want every member of society to be completely submissive for the good of civilization. The only way these leaders feel will create these kinds of societal members is by psychologically conditioning them. The question I feel is very important is why these leaders link stability in a civilization with total submission. I believe it's because having total control is what most people who get just a taste of power seem to hunger for. Just a few examples would be Adolf Hitler or Hernando Cortes. Ok, sure I'll admit that the leaders from the A.F. time are not cruel and ruthless like Hitler or Cortes, but it doesn't change the fact that stability is just another name they call control, and this control is what gives these leaders happinness. The other part to that first quote says "no social stability without individual stability." This means "every one belongs to every one else." Families are prohibited and long-term relationships are definitely off-limits. I find this incredibly odd. How can anyone find true happiness if he or she is not able to find true love? Consequetly, how can an unhappy population be submissive? In the belief of the Controllers, a nonsubmissive society is an unstable one.
"Stability," insisted the Controller, "stability. The primal and the ultimate need. Stability. Hence all this." - Brave New World, page 43.
Chapter 3 was a very challenging chapter for me. It was just as much confusing as it was tiring to read. But through all that confusion I found an anaphora! That will be helpful for my Literary Terms Journal. Anyway, this anaphora helped to reiterate the concept that readers discovered in earlier chapters and that I have already discussed. Leaders want every member of society to be completely submissive for the good of civilization. The only way these leaders feel will create these kinds of societal members is by psychologically conditioning them. The question I feel is very important is why these leaders link stability in a civilization with total submission. I believe it's because having total control is what most people who get just a taste of power seem to hunger for. Just a few examples would be Adolf Hitler or Hernando Cortes. Ok, sure I'll admit that the leaders from the A.F. time are not cruel and ruthless like Hitler or Cortes, but it doesn't change the fact that stability is just another name they call control, and this control is what gives these leaders happinness. The other part to that first quote says "no social stability without individual stability." This means "every one belongs to every one else." Families are prohibited and long-term relationships are definitely off-limits. I find this incredibly odd. How can anyone find true happiness if he or she is not able to find true love? Consequetly, how can an unhappy population be submissive? In the belief of the Controllers, a nonsubmissive society is an unstable one.Pavlov's Dogs Allusion
"INFANT NURSERIES. NEO-PAVLOVIAN CONDITIONING ROOMS, announced the notice board." - Brave New World, page 18.
![]()
Chapter 2 of Aldous Huxley's Brave New World is all about the psychological aspect of the genetically bred human beings. The Pavlov's Dogs allusion effectively demonstrates to the reader that these people are merely subjects of psychological conditioning. This conditioning creates a population of well-trained subjects incapable of completing any other task other than that assigned and predestined for them. The worst part is not that these people are completely brainwashed, it's that they don't even question the reasons for why things are ordered the way they are. I can not help but feel that this kind of conditioning is merely animal-like behavior. I mean, come on, this demonstration was originally coined by the effects it had on DOGS! Was the government so power-hungry that it had to completely brainwash its members in order to create order and control? This seems like a lot of childish behavior if you ask me. However, the ironic part of this entire situation is that we can not imagine a time where people have no control of their lives whereas these people cannot imagine living in our time. We are so trained to believe that we have the right to be free and express ourselves. How is this any different than the people after Ford's time being trained to believe that the jobs they do are the only jobs they can or ever will do?
Chapter 2 of Aldous Huxley's Brave New World is all about the psychological aspect of the genetically bred human beings. The Pavlov's Dogs allusion effectively demonstrates to the reader that these people are merely subjects of psychological conditioning. This conditioning creates a population of well-trained subjects incapable of completing any other task other than that assigned and predestined for them. The worst part is not that these people are completely brainwashed, it's that they don't even question the reasons for why things are ordered the way they are. I can not help but feel that this kind of conditioning is merely animal-like behavior. I mean, come on, this demonstration was originally coined by the effects it had on DOGS! Was the government so power-hungry that it had to completely brainwash its members in order to create order and control? This seems like a lot of childish behavior if you ask me. However, the ironic part of this entire situation is that we can not imagine a time where people have no control of their lives whereas these people cannot imagine living in our time. We are so trained to believe that we have the right to be free and express ourselves. How is this any different than the people after Ford's time being trained to believe that the jobs they do are the only jobs they can or ever will do?Shock and Irony
"If you knew the amount of overtime I had to put in after the last Japanese earthquake!" - Henry Foster, Brave New World, page 10.
For my first blog entry, I am going to discuss both my personal reaction to this quote and also the example of irony that it provides. First off, I thought it quite odd that Henry Foster was able to talk of the death of obviously so many people with humor as described by Huxley as he "laughed goodhumouredly." This is a perfect example of how people during this time are seen somewhat as disposable "wastages" that can easily be replaced. Foster was more focused on the amount of time he had to spend replacing these people than the actual lives that were lost. We, being the people living in the twenty-first century and more specifically 2012 A.D., can truly understand the preciousness of life and can not help but wonder what would cause a person to talk about the death of innocent people jokingly. Now, the irony I find with this quote is that it is without a doubt something that can be related to in our world. Just recetly, a momentous earthquake/tsunami struck Japan, killing over 10,000 people (this number resulting from both the earthquake and tsunami)! In the day and age of Huxley's Brave New World, the lives of others can easily be replaced and therefore, have less importance or value, if you will. The effect this literary device has is to help us cherish the lives of others because we know that they can never be replaced. Hopefully, our world will never come to be in any way similar to Huxley's vision of future Earth, for it would truly be sad for the value of life to be forgotten.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)