The book is basically a dystopian novel, set in the future a few centuries from now, describing a centrally controlled and manipulative society.
In broad outlines, the book is quite comparable to George Orwell's 1984, though the specifics and the style of story telling, of course, differ quite a bit.
In the Brave New World, the society consists of a distinct hierarchy of social classes (alphas, betas, gammas, deltas and epsilons), to which people are "engineered" during before and after birth. Moreover, in place of God, there is Ford (Henry Ford, that is), and the use of the drug "Soma" is quite prevalent.
Was it good?
Truth to be told, the book was a disappointment. I had really high expectations, i.e. that the book would be comparable to Orwell's masterful 1984, but I found the book at places quite difficult to follow and to be engaged with. Thus, I kept wondering throughout the book, given that it has been considered as one of the major works of literature in the 20th century, whether there simply is something that I fail to grasp or appreciate - perhaps a subtle subtext giving a unified meaning to everything. Could be.
However, towards the end of the book, chapter 16 differs from the general pattern quite pleasantly. In this chapter, one of the characters embarks on a monologue, discussing quite extensively about the properties of the focal societal order and how it brings about all kinds of benefits. It is here that Huxley, in my opinion, delivers his best societal criticism, and provides some food for thought concerning our (or his 1930s) societal order. For example:
"But chastity means passion, chastity means neurasthenia. And passion and neurasthenia mean instability. And instability means the end of civilization. You can't have a lasting civilization without plenty of pleasant vices."
In a way, it seems that the book up to that point was a lengthy and somewhat obscure build-up to this crystallization of the message in chapter 16.
The main take-away for me?
Of course, any dystopian novel should provide as its main take-away a heightened awareness of the (often invisible) prevailing societal order and the unspoken premises on which it is build. This is the case with this book as well. However, I think that Orwell's 1984 does a better job in this respect. However, The Brave New World does a better job with regard to social classes (or stratification), no doubt about it.
Who should read the book?
As a classic of 20th century Western literature, the book should be on everybody's reading list. However, based on my own experience, I think that one would be better off, if one read a scholarly commentary of the book instead (not, however, that I had read one yet).
The book on Amazon.com: Brave new world
No comments:
Post a Comment