|
Blind Optimism in the New World
by Rachael Eames A technology-obsessed society of despair. That's what Aldous Huxley will forever be remembered as being the prophetic voice of, simultaneously creatively envisioning and yet ever so forcefully warning of with remarkable foresight. Ironically, the protagonist of Brave New World is not a civilized man, but a savage. The "Savage," who has a passionate love- albeit obsolete in the civilized world- for the poetry of William Shakespeare, quotes the words of Miranda from The Tempest numerous times throughout the work. "How beauteous mankind is! O brave new world" (Huxley 209). I believe that Miranda and the Savage, in addition to being parallel characters, embody a lesson that is not only relevant for the 21st century, but intended for it. "Huxley's Brave New World is a picture of the development of the Western industrial world, provided it continues to follow the present trend without fundamental change" (Fromm 260). We who live in the 21st century would do well to take heed to the lesson that the Savage is forced to learn, and that lesson can be summed up in one claim: societal "progress," when believed in as the highest good of life, will consequentially lead to the diminishment of society's humanity. The character of Miranda in The Tempest, like the Savage in Huxley's novel, is nave and optimistic. Sheltered by her father Prospero from the world of men, Miranda is ecstatic with the prospect of a "brave, new world" that awaits her when she unites in marriage with Ferdinand. "O, wonder! How many goodly creatures are there here! How beauteous mankind is! O brave new world that has such people in it!" (Shakespeare 78) Prospero, however, as happy as he is for his daughter's newfound bliss, is acutely aware of the horrors of the "civilized world;" his reply to Miranda makes more sense in the context of his former experience with civilization: he himself had his dukedom usurped by his own brother. The audience thus understands his less than enthusiastic reply: "'Tis new to thee" (Ibid). It drips with irony. Miranda and the Savage share the same problem- blind optimism; the same sort of blind optimism that ushered in the 20th century. Aldous Huxley would know. The early 20th century in which Huxley grew up began with hopes and ideals- a century full of people determined to fulfill the "progressive hopes for mankind" (Watts). When World War I struck, it took away with it not just the souls of the men sacrificed in battle, but the soul of vibrant optimism that lived in the hearts of modern man. In addition, the Great Depression followed on its heels bringing disillusionment with the "American Dream" and widespread poverty. Instead of continuing the trend of reflecting what an ideal society should look like, authors like Huxley and George Orwell wrote of negative utopias (dystopias) in which "the future toward which we are moving" is described generally in terms of servitude to a tyranny or bureaucracy, the loss of human individuality and significance, and the horrors that await a completely industrialized and mechanized society made of people who have forgotten any ethical foundation for their choices and for their future (Fromm 258). Dystopias generally present societies of misery, and the effectiveness of the genre depends on how plausible the outlook is based on the contemporary milieu. Huxley's success, as Orwell's, is largely due to his work's relevance and its attack on the popular notion that progress is the greatest good for humanity (Gaydosik). Huxley's life "was a constant search for light, for understanding, of himself and his fellow men and women in the twentieth century" (Murray 1). In this search for understanding of the 20th century, Huxley emerged as the Prospero of the Age, the voice of wisdom to all the Mirandas and Savages of the day. According to author Neil Postman, Huxley identified the shift from technocracy to technopoly at the time when "Henry Ford's empire" emerged; hence, the dating system based on B.F. and A.F. (Before Ford and After Ford). Postman defines technopoly as "totalitarian technocracy" (48-49). At the time when Huxley wrote Brave New World, technology was increasing rapidly, but the problem lay not in that technology was advancing, but that technology was becoming messianic in nature. That is, the concept of "Progress," through technological and industrial means, had become God. Like Prospero, Huxley voices his concern that the "novelty" of something (in his case, technology) may shroud much deeper issues. "The success of twentieth-century technology in providing Americans with convenience, comfort, speed, hygiene, and abundance was so obvious and promising that there seemed no reason to look for any other sources of fulfillment or creativity or purpose" (54). The 20s through 30s era (Brave New World was published in 1932) involved great scientific changes and advances. Huxley was convinced that the 30s in particular was an age wherein Science superseded ethics (Baker 23).Technology delivered a promise to save the manual labor worker. Manufacturers turned to advertising. Ford's factory assembly line was introduced in 1914, and consumption began to trump production. People adopted the "buy now, pay later" attitude and started buying on credit. Leisure time expanded for the average worker with the help of technology and assembly lines. Full-bred "modernism" was blooming and arresting the hearts and minds of the people; the traditional "puritanical Victorian values" were fading away and becoming obsolete as more "modern ideas"- such as communism, promiscuity, hedonism, and materialism- commandeered the cultural stage ("Historical Context"). In Brave New World, Huxley predicted many outcomes for the so-called "progress" happening in his day. From genetic engineering to mental conditioning to constant entertainment-distraction to totalitarian government, Huxley's prescience into a future society begs the question- how accurate was he? According to author Robert Baker, the primary problem that Huxley faced and that we face today is not genetics or science per se, but "the potential exploitation of technological advances by a society given over to rampant consumerism, governed by massive centralized bureaucracy, and submissive to the ministrations of the expert or specialist" (9). Editor David Izzo is convinced that Huxley's world is truly coming to life. Specifically, he cites the lack of "soul" in contemporary society (Brave New World Essays 3). Progress comes at a cost- "the price we have to pay for stability" (Huxley 220). Furthermore, Huxley apparently picked up on a disturbing pattern of thinking occurring in the mid-20th century, namely the degradation of human life. Losing a proper respect for life is preceded by loss of individuality. In Brave New World, civilization's stability rests on everyone thinking the same and living the same. Unorthodoxy is the worst of crimes. Human life is reduced to mere self-indulgence, constant distraction and pleasure, and the creation of new workers conditioned to classes to keep the social machine running. Children are even "death-conditioned" in order to become accustomed to the more unpleasant aspects of life. Francis Schaeffer relates how loss of an appreciation for human life in the 20th century has open the floodgates to many social evils- although they are becoming acceptable in the modern eye- such as abortion, euthanasia, eugenics, and general abuse of genetic knowledge. Schaeffer also states that Huxley presented a society which "reversed the morality of the present" (26-37, 136). Another factor, in addition to the loss of sanctity of life, which contributes to loss of humanity in a society of "progress" is the extinction of religion. Postman argues that in a technopoly the "priests" that preside over the culture are the experts, such as psychiatrists, psychologists, sociologists, and statisticians. "The god they serve does not speak of righteousness or goodness or mercy or grace. Their god speaks of efficiency, precision, objectivitysin and evil disappear because they cannot be measured and objectified" (90). Mustapha Mond, the World Controller for Western Europe in Brave New World, tells the Savage that God simply isn't "compatible" with machines, science, and universal happiness. He even describes soma, the pleasure-inducing drug used by all civilized peoples, as "Christianity without tears" (Huxley 234, 238).Having witnessed and experienced first-hand the degradation and despair of the current society, the Savage alone understands that enthroning "progress" comes at the cost of meaning and purpose. "But I don't want comfort. I want God, I want poetry, I want real danger, I want freedom, I want goodness. I want sin" (240). So far the consequences of a technopoly are the forfeiture of life's sanctity, the sacrifice of individuality, and the obliteration and replacement of religion. One cannot overlook another consequence that the technopoly essentially requires- totalitarian rule. The government in Brave New World sustains its authority through "hypnoid mass suggestion" (Fromm 260). Basically, the government utilizes psychological conditioning through propaganda. If anyone ever begins to feel badly or start thinking too deeply, they are conditioned to pop a gramme of soma into their mouths. "People are happy; they get what they want, and they never want what they can't getand if anything should go wrong, there's soma" (Huxley 220). Historically, progress in society is frequently mistaken as being necessitated by the enlargement of government. Certainly this is the case in Brave New World; its world is controlled by a government that invades every area of life. As a leviathan bureaucracy, it "has no intellectual, political, or moral theory- except for its implicit assumption that efficiency is the principal aims of all social institutions and that other goals are essentially less worthy, if not irrelevant" (Postman 85). Government in Brave New World exists to regulate. It regulates behavior, it regulates thought, it regulates education, it regulates class hierarchy, it regulates and regulates and regulates "womb to tomb." Government's role is to inform us as to what we should know and protect us from that which we shouldn't. Its only ethic is the utilitarian ethic. What is good is determined by what works for society, what keeps its wheels turning. For this reason, when the Savage questions Mond as to why the people are not allowed to read poetry or ancient religious texts, Mond replies that there is no use for them. "Beauty's attractive, and we don't want people to be attracted by old things. We want them to like the new ones" (Huxley 219). The only belief a person can adhere to in such a society is a belief that they have been conditioned to by the powers that be. The cost of societal progress, according to Huxley, is as follows: the loss of personality and individuality, degradation of human life, elimination of religion and of a framework for meaning, establishment of totalitarian bureaucracy, and the enthronement of Science or the nebulous concept of "Progress" as God. "Man is but a complex arrangement of chemical elements, and his proper satisfactions lie in the consumption of other chemical elements: material pleasures, physical actions that consume his tissues and necessitate the further intake of material items" (Watts). All of which is to say: man loses his humanity. Schaeffer believes that every age stands or falls based on how its people are treated. Humanity is determined by human interaction (15).When faced with the inhumanity and cruelty of civilization, the Savage finds himself faced with two choices: isolation or suicide. Because the Savage cannot fence civilization out, he chooses the latter. Blind optimism is a dangerous thing. Both Miranda and the Savage made the mistake of being blinded by novelty and great expectations. Huxley is the Prospero of the 20th century, and perhaps a Cassandra whose voice is unheeded or slighted. The warning: the world in which progress is king is a world which will turn out to be neither brave nor new, for the tale of human nature is the oldest and most immutable of them all. Technology, although capable of engendering remarkable good, when put in a position of deity, will become a turncoat, a renegade that destroys the souls of those it was expected to save. The greatest peril, one which Huxley subtly identifies, is the automatic assumption that the endeavors and ideologies of science and technology are "value-free" (Baker 38). However, it does not come down to a black-and-white choice: technology or humanity. We are not left, like the Savage, with the dilemma of escapism or death and despair. Rather, it comes down to a choice that involves the cooperation of every individual: what will humanity do with technology? Will we surrender our humanity to technology, or subjugate technology to our humanity? In either case, we must warn of optimism that fails to consider reality, not because technology poses a threat, but because humanity does. We must reserve our judgment until we determine humanity's. In the words of Bernard Marx, "Hadn't you better wait till you actually see the new world?" Works Cited Baker, Robert S. Brave New World: History, Science, and Dystopia. Boston: Twayne Publishers, 1990. Fromm, Erich. Afterword. 1984. By George Orwell. New York: Harcourt, Brace, & Co., 1961. 258-261. Gaydosik, Victoria. "Dystopian novels." Facts On File Companion to the British Novel: 20th Century, vol. 2. New York: Facts On File, Inc., 2006. Bloom's Literary Reference Online. Facts On File, Inc. http://www.fofweb.com/activelink2.asp?ItemID=WE54&SID=5&iPin= GCBNII148&SingleRecord=True (accessed April 25, 2009). "Historical Context: Brave New World." EXPLORING Novels. Detroit: Gale, 2003. Discovering Collection. Gale. MORENet Columbia College. 4 Apr. 2009 . Huxley, Aldous. Brave New World. New York: HarperCollins, 1998. Huxley's Brave New World: Essays. Eds. David Garrett Izzo and Kim Kirkpatrick. Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Co., 2008. Murray, Nicholas. Aldous Huxley: A Biography. New York: St. Martin's Press, 2002. Postman, Neil. Technopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology. New York: Vintage, 1993. Schaeffer, Francis A., and C. Everett Koop, M.D. Whatever Happened to the Human Race? Old Tappan, New Jersey: Fleming H. Revell, 1979. Shakespeare, William. The Tempest. New York: Penguin Books, 1999. Watts, Harold H. "Aldous Huxley." Twayne's English Author Series Online. New York: G.K. Hall Co., 1999. Article Source: http://www.faithwriters.com |