Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

1984 v. Brave New World

lettersofnote.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 204 posts

Re: 1984 v. Brave New World

#31

Post by Loughla »

netcan wrote: post #22

These are two giants in science fiction, in political philosophy and in pop culture. I'm a big fan of both. Great to read a discussion between them. First, there's the artistic stele of the books. 1984 has got this graphic novel, Noir feel to it, like Walking Dead or Sin City. Brave New World has this brightly colored surreal feel to it. It's hard to compare books that are different in this way. Overall, Orwell's wor…

See, I'm just the opposite. With as hedonistic as human nature seems to be, it makes perfect sense that the pursuit of happiness leads to nothing but; in other words, A Brave New World.

1984 felt just too dystopian. It just tasted wrong; like someone would have stood up and said, "No thank you" well before the point the book stepped into.

A Brave New World? That's simply distraction taken to the nth degree. Perfectly plausible.

I read Huxley's book when I was a teenager, and as you said, it shaped how I see things. Moderation and critical thinking are key in everything (moderation, even in moderation).

Re: 1984 v. Brave New World

#32

Post by pistle »

devindotcom wrote: post #29
roel_v wrote: post #13

I never quite understood was was 'dystopian' about Brave New World. A world in which everybody is happy and content with who they are and the circumstances they live in, how is that dystopian? He threw in some bad things (the people in the reserves, the people who didn't take their meds, the 'conditioning' of the children) but never really justified why they'd be necessary. All of them (and the 'orgy-porgies') were,…

Boy oh boy. Well, the thing is it is a society that is completely in thrall to a system of basic pleasure orchestrated with the questionable justification that a life without real pleasure or pain is a better one. The people are oblivious to all art and real achievement, they have no desires and no ambitions, they create nothing and have no desire to, they feel no real emotions and all sex is mechanical, and they hap…

How is now not what you describe? Maybe there are no clear puppet-masters driving it, but vast swaths of people in the US live like this and fervently support it right now.

Re: 1984 v. Brave New World

#33

Post by Loughla »

roel_v wrote: post #13

I never quite understood was was 'dystopian' about Brave New World. A world in which everybody is happy and content with who they are and the circumstances they live in, how is that dystopian? He threw in some bad things (the people in the reserves, the people who didn't take their meds, the 'conditioning' of the children) but never really justified why they'd be necessary. All of them (and the 'orgy-porgies') were,…

Most cattle are relatively happy, have their medicine, their wild versions, conditioning of their young and forced sex (orgy-porgies without the orgy. . . ).

Do the social structure and outlook of cattle appeal to you?

Edit: because that's what the dystopia presented in A Brave New World is similar to.

Re: 1984 v. Brave New World

#34

Post by solitus »

dicroce wrote: post #8

I think the problem with Huxleys predictions come from his not realizing how blunt an instrument narcotics are... Fine work and subtle tweaks are beyond our power (just look at the side effects)... Using drugs to adjust personality is like using a sledgehammer to rearrange porcelain figurines. Not that we might not get there of course.... but we'll have many years of boots stomping on faces in the interim.

What about all those anti-anxiety, anti-depressant and ADHD drugs ?

Many students I know were on ADHD drugs even though they didn't really need it.

Many professionals are on anti-anxiety and anti-depressants now too...

Re: 1984 v. Brave New World

#35

Post by notahacker »

stormbrew wrote: post #3

Right now it rather seems Orwell had it closer to right on the predictions in the letter: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/54/US_incarc... Some of this stuff is expanded on in Huxley's forword to BNW[1], btw, written in 1947. I have always been fascinated by this assertion in it: As political and economic freedom diminishes, sexual freedom tends compensatingly to increase. He doesn't support this axiom…

I'm not convinced by the thesis that sexual freedom is inversely related to political and economic freedom, but if you were to chart virtually any of indicator "sexual freedom" over the same time period as that graph of prison population the trend line would certainly be moving in the same direction.[1] Same goes for "level of alarm at the apparent 'decadence' of modern society expressed by economically poorer and religiously strict cultures" which is a pretty major theme in the book.

For all Brave New World's glib exaggeration for comic effect, I'd argue that anticipating sexual liberation (and mass consumerism and distraction-based mass media strategy) was a far more perceptive view of the future than Orwell's ideological slavery. Whatever the intended or actual psychological effects of the "War on Drugs" may be, those prison sentences certainly aren't an Orwellian attempt to unite the population in support of the executive. Then again, Huxley was satirising what he perceived as relatively novel trends emerging in the United States whereas Orwell directed his ire at the Soviet Union, fascism and highlighted tendencies present in virtually every other authoritarian state that had gone before.

Re: 1984 v. Brave New World

#36

Post by nickff »

stormbrew wrote: post #15
bpodgursky wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMO Huxley's predictions are much harder to appreciate given the relativity of cultural norms to what we grew up experiencing. While it's certainly possible to be desensitized to totalitarian oppression, I think it's harder to really appreciate the a more gradual cultural shift wrt acceptance of mood-altering prescription drugs, sexuality, mass market entertainment, etc. Not scientific in the slightest, I just think…

One of the issues I have with Huxley's view of things is that I think it makes a massive leap from the idea of people being content to that being pathologized into being oppressed. Part of that is that I'm not sure there's ever been a point in history in which the majority of people actively contribute to the political sphere on a regular basis. They have always been distracted by something (often mere survival). Eve…

The people of "Brave New World" (BNW) are not truly content, they are merely happy. The BNWers are terrified of being without their soma, because without the soma, they realize their lives are empty and unfulfilling. The soma is a way to escape the reality of their lives, and avoid any self-awareness or unpleasant truths. If you were to examine their lives under almost any metric, such as Maslow's hierarchy of needs, you would see that they are not leading good lives; in Maslow's terms, they have only satisfied their physiological and safety needs.

I would not describe this state as 'content and non-participant', it is more of a self-perpetuating drug-induced ignorance.

Re: 1984 v. Brave New World

#37

Post by ctdonath »

molsongolden wrote: post #19
roel_v wrote: post #13

I never quite understood was was 'dystopian' about Brave New World. A world in which everybody is happy and content with who they are and the circumstances they live in, how is that dystopian? He threw in some bad things (the people in the reserves, the people who didn't take their meds, the 'conditioning' of the children) but never really justified why they'd be necessary. All of them (and the 'orgy-porgies') were,…

I just logged in to ask a similar question and would like to hear what others thoughts are on this. I don't support the ideas or situation described in BNW but what is the alternative that we should hope to achieve? How do we draw the line between "helping people live happier lives" and "tricking the masses into contented servitude"? What is the ultimate goal of humanity and our global society? What should it be? How…

Which is the greater horror: oppressively managed lives imposed on the populace, or sought by the populace?

"Billions of people just living out their lives, oblivious. Did you know that the first Matrix was designed to be a perfect human world, where none suffered, where everyone would be happy? It was a disaster. No one would accept the program, entire crops were lost. Some believed we lacked the programming language to describe your perfect world, but I believe that, as a species, human beings define their reality through misery and suffering. The perfect world was a dream that your primitive cerebrum kept trying to wake up from." - _The_Matrix_

Re: 1984 v. Brave New World

#38

Post by PavlovsCat »

roel_v wrote: post #13

I never quite understood was was 'dystopian' about Brave New World. A world in which everybody is happy and content with who they are and the circumstances they live in, how is that dystopian? He threw in some bad things (the people in the reserves, the people who didn't take their meds, the 'conditioning' of the children) but never really justified why they'd be necessary. All of them (and the 'orgy-porgies') were,…

> A world in which everybody is happy and content with who they are and the circumstances they live in, how is that dystopian?

Because being happy and content is by far not all what makes life worth living, and these people are stuck in eternal mental infancy. And they don't get a choice, either: they are conditioned to despise natural birth, not sleeping around, and deep affection -- and the caste system is proper for insects maybe, but not fully developed human beings. It is not what they eventually happened to agree on, it was engineered that way, they were born into it without even the ability to see what has been done to them, and all of this calculated. They are instant gratification junkies in an endless loop of mental stagnation, what's not to hate?

> but never really justified why they'd be necessary. All of them (and the 'orgy-porgies') were, I felt, added to be able to make the argument that the society he was portraying was morally wrong.

Do you think Huxley is making the argument that "being happy and content is bad", and the rest is just filler? If so, read his this one:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Island_%28Huxley_novel%29

Clearly, he's not against being happy and content. But it has to be real and come from within, not just from being deprived of the ability to grasp injustice or reasons to be sad, or reasons to love (which implies the possibility and eventual reality of loss, too).

If I injected you with drugs that made you a mindless, but very happy and healthy zombie, and hooked you up to IV everything-you-need -- "you" (there would not be much left of the former you) would love it, but how would your friends react? Badly. Does this then mean they are against happiness? Of course not.

Re: 1984 v. Brave New World

#39

Post by ecocentrik »

pistle wrote: post #32
devindotcom wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Boy oh boy. Well, the thing is it is a society that is completely in thrall to a system of basic pleasure orchestrated with the questionable justification that a life without real pleasure or pain is a better one. The people are oblivious to all art and real achievement, they have no desires and no ambitions, they create nothing and have no desire to, they feel no real emotions and all sex is mechanical, and they hap…

How is now not what you describe? Maybe there are no clear puppet-masters driving it, but vast swaths of people in the US live like this and fervently support it right now.

Yes, this is now. Welcome to the ultimate revolution. Enjoy your stay.

Re: 1984 v. Brave New World

#40

Post by oceanstone »

Loughla wrote: post #31
netcan wrote: post #22

These are two giants in science fiction, in political philosophy and in pop culture. I'm a big fan of both. Great to read a discussion between them. First, there's the artistic stele of the books. 1984 has got this graphic novel, Noir feel to it, like Walking Dead or Sin City. Brave New World has this brightly colored surreal feel to it. It's hard to compare books that are different in this way. Overall, Orwell's wor…

See, I'm just the opposite. With as hedonistic as human nature seems to be, it makes perfect sense that the pursuit of happiness leads to nothing but; in other words, A Brave New World. 1984 felt just too dystopian. It just tasted wrong; like someone would have stood up and said, "No thank you" well before the point the book stepped into. A Brave New World? That's simply distraction taken to the nth degree. Perfectly…

> A Brave New World? That's simply distraction taken to the nth degree. Perfectly plausible.

Good point. Technology can help create newer, more engaging distractions. Magic Leap hopes to offer a new "magical" layer on top of reality, when their devices are "on", for instance.

> 1984 felt just too dystopian. It just tasted wrong; like someone would have stood up and said, "No thank you" well before the point the book stepped into.

This is part of why there's such a push towards punishing intelligence community whistleblowers. When the public is made aware of the mass surveillance programs, they do say "No thank you."

Both books examine a different facet of human nature, and they both remain relevant to this day.

Post reply on HN