It is interesting the way in which we find ourselves grasping for the truth about today by reading exaggerated depictions of modern advancements and societal norms. As the reader swims in the dystopias of Huxley and Orwell, the question becomes who is our biggest enemy: the government or ourselves? Are the powers of technological advancements thrust upon us or do we walk blindly and self-guided into a world of infinite scientific advancements? Ultimately, the power is invested in the will of the people, as suggested by Huxley. While the Big Brother of Orwell's world looks over a society that reflects current human tendency, Huxley's chilling world, as Neil Postman suggests, holds more relevancy.
Self-destruction is more powerful and consequential than governmental oppression. In Huxley's world, oppression comes from obsession with technology that has the power to "undo their capacities to think," (Postman). The advancement of technology enhanced with the necessity of leisure allows for the invention of entertainment machines that enduce high levels of consumption and production, which provides a foundation of consumerism. The importance and money invested in the advertisement business today mirrors this idea of comsumption based on leisure. In Orwell's 1984, technology, such as the telescreens, are used as a means of governmental control, attempting to brainwash the citizens in submission. However, technology in Huxley's world is used for self-advancement. Whether it be to play sports without leaving the couch or holding a business meeting online, today's society utilizes technological advancements for the sake of efficiency, leisure, and ease.
Closely linked, science and technology develop hand-in-hand today today and in Huxley's dystopia. Science in Orwell's invented society is used to suppress emotions, since "people are controlled by inflicting pain," (Postman). Huxley's dystopia, however utilizes scientific advancement in the State's neverending quest for truth and stability. The Bokanovsky Process exemplifies this utilization of science by fostering social stability since the clones it produces are predestined to perform identical tasks at identical machines. This shows a fear of the unknown-a fear that uncontrolled, natural births could result in children with defects or qualities that would upset the balance of the leisure-based society. Today the idea of "designer babies" reduce the fear of the unknown, as controversial embryonic research and stem cell research look to prevent disease and unfavorable traits.
Orwell feared a society driven by pain and ignorance of human impulse. Huxley, on the other hand “feared we would become a trivial culture, preoccupied with some equivalent of the feelies,” (Postman). Sexual temptation is certainly not suppressed in society. Since Alfred Kinsey shocked the American society of the 1940s with his revelations of sexual habits among married and unmarried couples, sex as slowly removed the “taboo” sticker. TV shows such as Sex and the City center around sexual lifestyles, and jokes popular even among middle school students are often sexually based. The act of sex in Huxley’s society is driven by a system of social rewards for promiscuity and lack of commitment. In the media, affairs are romanticized and the idea of single men and women having multiple sexual partners is commonplace.
Here we stand in 2009 in a society of technological advancements and leisure. Why get off the couch to play sports? The virtual world is just…..well….easier. While some will argue that Orwell’s oppressive government mirrors society today, Huxley’s leisure-centered, self-destructive society is much more relevant.
Wii anyone?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Elle,
You have a great argument for the relevancy of Huxley's world.The points you bring up are good in specifically targeting areas in today's society that are similar to Huxley's. Yet I think overall we have not reached the point of Huxley's world, nor will we want to reach it. As a whole, do you think Orwell's has more relevancy rather than specific examples? There is a big difference between not getting off the couch to play a video game, but what about torture by the government to release or withold information?
"Self-destruction is more powerful and consequential than governmental oppression."
--Really? Is that what you think? Interesting. It has always been my belief that governmental oppression LEADS to self-destructive tendencies. Was that not clearly shown in every dystopian novel that we have read--the majorital aquiescence to the oppressive government, people losing their individualities?
An oppressive regime is certainly moer detrimental than your aforesaid self-setruction, for it will ultimately lead to those same qualities, forcing them on its citizenry.
I completely agree with your assessment of Brave New World being more relevant to today's society. I like how you brought in some history with the sexual research of Kinsey and tied some of the ideas presented in the novel with common things in society today like the show Sex and the City and the Wii. I mentioned stem cell research as a major parallel in my blog as well for I think it is definitely something that could, if used incorrectly, lead to the designer babies in Brave New World.
I also liked how you mentioned the fear of the unknown with respect to child-birth because I definitely think that was a large part of the novel. Without complete control over society, including how babies will be born, there would be too much left to the unknown. The government in Brave New World is far too afraid to leave anything up to chance therefore they make sure that absolutely everything is under their control.
Post a Comment