Has anyone read these books lately? I read them in High School, and then read them again a few months ago. Interesting how different they seem now vs. then. Not sure if it was the naivete of youth, or if I really am seeing more and more movement towards the futures described in these books now. Any thoughts?
Brave New World and 1984
- Thread starter Blondie
- Start date
Wow, it's been years since I've read either. You've inspired me to pick them up and see how they've aged.
This is on my list to read again as it has been about 13 years since I read it last. I recently read Atlas Shrugged which was very interesting.
I read 1984 this past year in HS. It was a great book and it is amazing how much of it is coming true.
"Lord of the Flies" is a pretty good read, also. To me, at least, it seems to be where we are heading as a society.
Four legs good, two legs better.
Four legs good, two legs better.
Sorry, but I hated the book. It was a pain getting through it.
What? Four legs, two legs? That's "Animal Farm". What does that have to do with William Golding's "Lord of the Flies"?
i really enjoyed animal farm and 1984. a few of my friends have recommended brave new world to mu but i havent read it yet
Very cool! I posted a 1984 quote on my Facebook update just this afternoon!
I love them both, I usually throw in Farenheit 451 and discuss them as the trio of dystopia.
I like F451 the most since its more hopeful air satisfies the optimist in me. I don't really by into the (in my opinion over analytical) conclusion that Winston, in 1984, in allowing himself to be broken was freeing himself. The though being that once Winston adopted "doublethink" he was actually committing the ultimate form of rebellion since "doublethink" is defined by Orwell as "The power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them....To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies..." analysists believe that Winston did exactly that and as he contemplated with his rebellion, and that he re-affirmed his original belief as he was being executed.
To me that sort of belies the hopelessness that Orwell was trying to convey. Orwell was illustrating the crushing weight of the totalitarian state and its ability to grind humanity into paste, which is exactly what happened to Winston.
As for Brave New World....wouldn't we all like to believe that once modernized, the savage man can go back. Well, he can't! Its both a simpler story than either F451 or 1984 and a more expansive one. Bradbury and Orwell were talking about the alienation of man vs. the state. Huxley was talking about man's alienation from his own advancement.
Great books all of them.
I love them both, I usually throw in Farenheit 451 and discuss them as the trio of dystopia.
I like F451 the most since its more hopeful air satisfies the optimist in me. I don't really by into the (in my opinion over analytical) conclusion that Winston, in 1984, in allowing himself to be broken was freeing himself. The though being that once Winston adopted "doublethink" he was actually committing the ultimate form of rebellion since "doublethink" is defined by Orwell as "The power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them....To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies..." analysists believe that Winston did exactly that and as he contemplated with his rebellion, and that he re-affirmed his original belief as he was being executed.
To me that sort of belies the hopelessness that Orwell was trying to convey. Orwell was illustrating the crushing weight of the totalitarian state and its ability to grind humanity into paste, which is exactly what happened to Winston.
As for Brave New World....wouldn't we all like to believe that once modernized, the savage man can go back. Well, he can't! Its both a simpler story than either F451 or 1984 and a more expansive one. Bradbury and Orwell were talking about the alienation of man vs. the state. Huxley was talking about man's alienation from his own advancement.
Great books all of them.
Absolutely nothing! My subconscious was attempting a thread hijack...What? Four legs, two legs? That's "Animal Farm". What does that have to do with William Golding's "Lord of the Flies"?
Think they used cartridge razors or DE ones in 1984? Bet the those gnarly animals in Animal Farm used a straight edge to shave their fur!
What? Four legs, two legs? That's "Animal Farm". What does that have to do with William Golding's "Lord of the Flies"?
Hold on there ... in both books the death of a pig is of central importance, and the dead pig becomes rather deified in a somewhat twisted way.
They probably used DEs. After all, they said "blades", not "cartridges".
Actually, if you watch the film version he uses a nasty old type with a rusty blade.
Rubbish!
Orwell presents the alienation of man from reality. Remember, a central tenet of the Party's philosophy is "He who controls the present, controls the past. He who controls the past controls the future". Winston Smith is forced to acknowledge the power the Party has in enforcing this detachment, this alienation, not only by the brute-force methods employed in Room 101 but also by the subtleties of doublethink.Technology has been frozen at the point where it can most effectively serve the Party.
In contrast, Huxley presents a world where technology has been allowed to advance so that the individual may detach himself from reality - by soma and unlimited and uncommitted sex - without the need for Government enforcement. This alienation is presented as being natural and normal and those who question the orthodoxy (like Bernard Marx and Helmholtz Watson) are physically marginalized (by being exiled) but otherwise not interfered with or tortured.
The lesson of the Savage is that his life had spiritual meaning, despite material want, as opposed to the diametric opposite found in the 'modern' world. Thus, Huxley presents the argument that spiritual death arises from excess consumption and the normalization of shallow, material existence.
I took a Lit class in college called 'Brave New Worlds' entirely devoted to dystopian works. We read a book a week. It was excellent. Some works I had read previously (1984, BNW, A Scanner Darkly, Neuromancer), which is what got me interested in the class.
One of my fav classes of all time. First, because it was sort of a recreational break from the hard sciences I spent most of my time on, and second, because I was introduced to a whole genre of work I hadn't realized had the depth that it does. There are a lot of great dystopian works out there.
One of my fav classes of all time. First, because it was sort of a recreational break from the hard sciences I spent most of my time on, and second, because I was introduced to a whole genre of work I hadn't realized had the depth that it does. There are a lot of great dystopian works out there.
Think high enough of your own opinion? Next time your opinion differs from someone elses try to be more gentlemanly about it....oh, and then it might make your point stronger if you don't then go and agree with the opinion that you just called rubbish! Which, it certainly seems the bolded portion of yours below does with the bolded portion of mine above.
- Thread starter
- #18
Man did this get hijacked! Aside from all the detail in the selected works, are we as a society moving more towards a totalitarian state as depicted in these works? Subquestion: as technology increases, and society advances, is more monitoring, and less individual privacy THE inevitable destination for a said society?
Yeah, the usual take is that Orwell was wrong--we're not being prodded to our doom by a malicious tyrant, but rather (as per Huxley) skipping happily down that final path, anesthetized to our pain and feelings by physical pleasure and mindless entertainment that replaces reality. We care more about people on TV fighting for a touchdown, singing contract, or internship with a toupee'd billionaire than we do about our own neighbors. And the news? Well, it's pretty clear we're more excited by kidnapped blonde girls thousands of miles away than we are about local political decisions that will actually affect our lives.
Go us.
Go us.
