Is it bad that I don't actually see that society as a dystopia?

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Not bad, I guess just different perspective. How can you defend a bunch of people being exactly the same, no family ties, taking drugs, and being basically mind controlled though? I'm honestly curious

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Well personally I have no emotional attachment to anyone in my family...or anyone in general for that matter. I find personal affection to be more of a burden than its worth but I suppose I can see the appeal some people have for it. For taking drugs....come on. And when the mind control is to the point of not knowing it I again don't see a problem. Especially when it obviously boost productivity so well. The lower people are genuinly happy to be where they are. Is that so bad? Another way to look at it is like in The Matrix. Their entire world was fake and they had no clue. Should we feel bad for them or let them live in blissful ignorance? That's really what that society is all about. Blissful ignorance. While it sounds cruel from today's standpoint where we understand free will (or so we think) when you think about it from each individuals perspective there is nothing wrong. And from a societal perspective things couldn't be better. Back to drugs. SOMA is where you begin to see the flaws in this society. Are they truly happy or are they just high? When you look at it from their point of view...what's the difference? Again we get back in to the Reality vs Perception debate.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I apologise for any typos and the brevity of the comment (though I used all 1200 characters) I'm on mobile. I would love to talk about this more when I'm at a computer.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

problem is though, Brave New World is one in which most of us would just be mindless genetic inferiors pushing elevator buttons all day. It's only the Alphas who get anything close to an awesome life. Brave New World is made to sound more appealing because of the hedonistic aspects, but I'm not so sure. Actually, as dystopias go, it probably is the most attractive choice. I'd live a million lives in that world before I lived one in 1984! hahaha

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Yes they're pushing buttons all day but that is what they love to do. So is it really a problem? It's more of a moral issue than anything but from a purely logical standpoint it makes sense. I'm not saying that I would prefer that over our current world (although...) I'm just saying that it seems good enough to not be considered a dystopia. They don't have to be scared in to being happy like in 1984. They're just genuinely happy.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I completely agree with Scientist. I didn't find Brave New World to be a dystopia at all. I felt it was completely a utopia. There wasn't worry, unhappiness, pain, suffering. Instant gratification is not something I find appalling. I don't see shame in taking the easy road. I feel like we're just so conditioned to find suffering brave and noble that anyone who attains happiness without struggle is less worthy of it. The superficiality of this society is not appalling to me either. If someone finds their happiness in instant money, sex or soma, I still think their happiness is just as genuine. The World State has flaws, but its structure is pretty successful. Conditioning people from birth to love their life is a win-win situation. We might pity the Deltas but they are just as happy, if not more, than we are. They are completely depraved of freedom, but freedom is not something they want, as shown by John unsuccessfully trying to get them to protest soma. To liberate them might not be as heroic as people may think. They don't want the right to be unhappy.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Freedom isn't something they KNOW! How would they know if they want it or not? They are brainwashed and not informed. They are mind-controlled and genetically altered. By definition this world IS a dystopia, because it is one based on falsehoods covered up in order to maintain control. It is a society where one BELIEVES they are happy, but in fact could be much happier. In that way it is the same as 1984. it can't be called "utopia", because by definition a utopia has to be free.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

They don't want freedom because they were conditioned that way. The government ensured that. A dystopia is a society that is highly controlled by the government, but it has to have some sort of important flaw that prevents it from being utopian. A utopia does not have to be free, it just has to be a place where everything is perfect. Freedom doesn't usually allow that to happen. They are completely manipulated but they are happy. They are not suffering and everyone is satisfied. They don't want liberation even when given the opportunity because they don't want to give up instant gratification. The government programmed them to be happy as a slave, so they are. For them, life is absolutely perfect and absolutely utopian.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Whether or not you agree that utopia requires freedom - a dystopia is characterized by the false impression of happiness and contentment, where there is in fact none. Perceived utopia is not utopia. That is what makes it a dystopia. The people are unaware of what is really happening to them, and control is maintained through these immoral means. The same is true of 1984 in fact. The people in Oceania perceive a utopia too, because they believe they are protected and safe from their foreign "enemies" by their loving leader. They believe the leader is generous to them and provides everything for them out of the goodness of his heart. The ones who go against this (IE, the ones that start to learn the truth) are thought criminals. Dystopia is such as it is defined by the READER, not by the characters within the story. Objectively speaking, it IS a dystopia

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Well as a reader, I find their society utopian, because everything there is perfect. Everything is programmed to be perfect and it works. The government grants happiness to all, and although I can see where it might seem dystopian, through the banishment of disagreers, I don't see why government-granted (forced) happiness/satisfaction is immoral. A dystopia is a society where everything is bad and dysfunctional. In a world where everyone's happy, how could that be a dystopia? In 1984, we are clearly shown the distress, fear, and paranoia people are living in. Everything in their world is run down and in poor condition, and everything centers around government control. In the World State, people are forced to be happy, but they genuinely are. It might be programmed happiness, but the happiness is genuine. It's honestly all subjective anyway, whether a society is dystopian or not. I realize Brave New World is widely known as a dystopia but I just don't think the society would be a place bad enough to be called dystopia.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

You don't find their socciety dysfunctional at all? The point is, if you were living in most "dystopian" societies, you would be under the impression that everything was great, fine and perfect. People in 1984 believed that the world they had was the BEST it could be. Gin and cigarettes were their "soma", as well as constant belief that the war would soon be won. They even believe their chocolate ration is going up. It seems to me you don't fully understand the concept of dystopia in fiction. You think BNW sounds awesome because you take soma and have recreational sex. But I'm talking objectively, and the society described by Huxley IS a dysfunctional and chilling society, where life, freedom and nature are reduce to mere factory-like processes. Thought and opposition are crushed with empty hedonism, and no one is allowed to pursue their own happiness. It is merely doled to them as a government standard. It is not REAL. that's what's dysfunctional and sinister about it.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

The 1984 government only wanted people to think that they were happy/were going to be happy very soon. It thrived on hope and destroyed the idea of unhappiness so they had nothing to compare it to. While BNW may be a dystopia by your definition its government does not thrive on psudo-happiness.The citizens are truly happy even in comparison to modern day society. Their happiness, although genetically engineered, is certainly not a false one and I think that is the difference.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

What makes it a dystopia is that it's a totally awful world, but the people in it don't find it awful. It's about perspective.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

You misunderestimate the happiness of the people in 1984 - the people are only "unhappy" because of their enemies - as long as their leader is there, they think they are happy and living in a paradise that is only limited by their enemy's evil-doings. They still believe that gin and cigarettes are the height of luxury, and that their chocolate ration is increasing, and fake news of war victories spurs people on to be joyous. It's not like everyone is sitting around talking about how terrible everything is. They're conditioned to believe that what they have is "double-plus good!". The residents of the world state only believe they're happy too - take away their soma and nursery rhymes and they don't know what to do! It is merely a perceived bliss, a cover up of a vile and dispicable world where everything is mass produced and controlled by an evil government

by Anonymous 11 years ago

@giggitygoo - RIGHT! That's what I was getting at. The dystopian aspect is clear to us as outsiders!

by Anonymous 11 years ago

To me, the quality of life and the relaxation and gratification seem more like a vacation than a dystopian society. This is not a society fueled on war, like 1984, but a society built on instant gratification and consumerism. They are not brainwashed to hate or to have violent nationalism, they are brainwashed to be simpletons who are happy about everything. In 1984 you can tell fear is rampant and with rations being decreased, there is a shortage of necessary things. BNW is a society based on the importance of happiness. The happiness and satisfaction of their citizens is what keeps their society from failing. Their standard of living is excellent, their technology is great, there is no war, there is no police state, and they frequently have time to leisure. It's a society that thrives on its citizens' gratifications and for that I do not view it as dystopian.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

It's a society that EXPLOITS the citizens base pleasure responses in exchange for total dominance and control. The dysfunction and chilling nature of it is EVIDENT. You can't just say they're "happy" and that's that. The dystopian element is that of a "negative utopia" - which by the way were the exact words used by Huxley to describe it. The world has lost all moral direction and all sense of identity and belief in exchange for mere hedonistic pleasure. The World State is run for profit, in such a way that keeps everyone subdued and unable to advance or better themselves. Brainwashing is brainwashing. When you take both novels down to their fundamental elements, the dystopic elements are the same. One society uses pleasure and the other uses fear, that's where the difference starts. But both sets of people are "content" in their lives, and "love" their leadership

by Anonymous 11 years ago

That's the thing. To me, using pleasure to exploit a person is not the same as using fear. If you exploit a person who doesn't //mind// being exploited, because they are in turn getting pleasure, it's not the same power over them as fear. They are conditioned to want exploitation, and to want the instant happiness in return. It's an exchange between them and the government that both approve of. After all this, I do see what you mean though, you're a really good debater.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

But they don't KNOW they're being exploited - how can you say that they don't mind it. They are lied to and brainwashed! thanks for the comment on my debate skills. i admire your passion for your position too, no matter how much i may despise it as nonsensical! mwuahahaha....hehe but anyway, you may think that if you lived in that society you'd be happy - and you would be! But that doesn't make it "utopia" because that happiness, no matter how you try and sugar coat it, is fake, it's contrived and induced using lies, drugs and sensory response. It's fundamentally the same thing as what they do in 1984 - therein lies the dysfunction. It is a dystopia through and through. As I have already pointed out though, given the chance to choose which dystopia I'd rather we build on earth, I'm thinking that BNW offers the best of the shitbucket

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Tommy I still disagree. You're describing a dystopia by pure definition in which case you're right, it is a dystopia. But by pure definition Vitamin C is a drug. I would never call it that because there is simply no need to. I think dystopia should be used to describe a world who's standard of living is noticeably worse than what we know and kept as such by the government who has no intention of improving the conditions of living. The BNW society was centred around both efficiency and general genuine happiness. Frankly I don't see how that is a dystopia at all except by pure definition.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

A dystopia is characterized by more than one thing. In the case of BNW, it is mostly characterized by dysfunction. The happiness that people experience is an illusion, and it's all based on lies and deceit. Describing the World State as a dystopia was Huxley's doing too, you know. The happiness is NOT genuine! How can it be if it requires drugs and controlled sensory input to manage? And if it is a dystopia by definition, then the OP is quite accurate in calling it dystopia is he not? All you're focusing on is how much you think you'd like to be in that society. That's not what a dystopia is, particularly when we're talking about fiction. The high level of dysfunction and upside-down-ness of the World State are what characterize it as a dystopia.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

utopia is more than things being "nice", it's a free and highly functional society of law and justice. How is the world in BNW an example of that?

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I actually agree with every thing you're saying. In fact I brought it up in my original comment explaining why I don't see it as a dystopia "SOMA is where you begin to see the flaws in this society. Are they truly happy or are they just high? When you look at it from their point of view...what's the difference? Again we get back in to the Reality vs Perception debate."

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I guess it's really about how you're looking at it. And you were right in saying I was basing my opinion on how much I like the society. It is absolutely a dystopia. But I still say that it is a very happy and efficient one. Anyway. Thanks for the discussion. It's nice to finally have a conversation not about politics or religion on this site.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Have to disagree with the OP - Brave New World is an excellent example of dystopia, but it can't be called THE quintessential dystopian novel. Personally I think 1984 is much more qualified. BUT, having said that, I need to be more objective, and say something like a group of dystopian fiction together make up the quintessential collection - my titles are as follows (in no particular order) 1) 1984 2) Brave New World 3) Clockwork Orange 4) Farenheit 451 5) Modern China (oh, wait, that's not a novel :-P)

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I may have had Fahrenheit 451 at three instead of four but that was the first one I read of the five so I may be a little biased.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

duh! It's in no particular order!

by Anonymous 11 years ago

ah sorry my mistake. I was going to say I wasn't sure how you could really rank them

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Personally, I do think 1984 would be my number 1. Mainly because it's more relevant to our world today

by Anonymous 11 years ago

If you want the quintessential //utopian// novel, I would highly recommend Aldous Huxley's other book, //Island//.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Not being sarcastic, thanks everyone for explaining your perspectives. It's nice to disagree and get to actually have a good discussion about why

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Have you read the other ones in my list?

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I haven't but I definitely wanna check them out

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I can't help feeling you just wanted to use big words.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

That being said, I used to say "castration" in too many sentences before even realizing what it meant. I named a hipster diner in a story I wrote the "Filipino Castration" and let my sister read it.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

they didn't really use any needless big words? quintessential is the best word to use and there are few synonyms for dystopia

by Anonymous 11 years ago