Along with books like The Bible, it isn’t necessarily the physical adventure that is most poignant, but what it implies. Brave New World takes place in a society where (for some reason) birth has been outdated, but casual sex is still very popular. I understand that there is a possibility of genetic engineering in our future (where I presume everything that comes out of the womb will be an Alpha-Plus), but the manufacturing and conditioning of babies just doesn’t seem like a reasonably likely answer to societies problems. We suffer from overpopulation, not a deficiency. I think a good indicator of a science fiction novel’s inherent good, is the correlation between the world it imagines, and the world we live in. It just makes for a better commentary in my opinion. The only r benefit of the doubt I will permit is that this book was written in the 1930s. Nearly one hundred years ago so I imagine the foresight may have been impeded.
As an essayist, I think Aldous Huxley is one of the finest. As a novelist, he comes up a bit short. I can’t tell if he is overly educated with an exceptional IQ or if he doesn’t really know what he is talking about. I think he has very constructive ideas, but poor execution. The novel follows a very particular scientific vocabulary that is acceptable if you enjoy odd dysmorphic descriptors.
Frankly, I was disappointed. Having read a few, very good books this year, I hope that I have not been recalibrated (like the humans in this book) to only enjoy the best, the finest literature, but isn’t this supposed to be one of the greatest Sci-fi novels ever written? There is a television show made this year about it. But no, in a world where free thought is discouraged, one man thinks for himself, is disciplined, until he finds that his superior has done an even more horrendous act (being a father), and then this unspeakable consequence becomes the focus of society. It makes no sense. If people are repulsed by the word “mother” (of which there is no instinctual reason, but is explained by being taught through sleep nursery rhymes of social conditioning), then why is there a celebration for her offspring? Perhaps an anomaly. More to the point, if these Savages exist around the world, what makes this one so special? Shouldn’t he be condemned? It is just not logical.
I may have not read close enough since it is a wordy book that I think gets enjoyment out of trying to outsmart the reader and pose itself as superior. I see through it. I am glad I finished it. For one, it does have a good structure. It is able to go in between characters and even reframe the focus of the book form Bernard Marx to John the Savage.
It also has a memorable scene in which the Savage confesses and then renounces his love for Lenina (a relatively fleshed out but one-dimensional female lead) out of artistic integrity. He won’t have sex with her when she offers, which, though I believe is far fetched (even for science fiction), was probably my favorite scene since it made me reminiscent of a young poet’s virginal love.
Another question…If art and science are condemned in this society, why are there journalists? Also, animals exist and reproduce naturally. I don’t think the word mother would be so unknown and taboo.
Overall, maybe I’m not smart enough to understand it on an intellectual level, but literarily it was ahead of its time, but far below today’s standards.
45/100
Second Opinion 66/100
Ben Bonkoske 